↓ Skip to main content

The hippocampus is required for visually cued contextual response selection, but not for visual discrimination of contexts

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The hippocampus is required for visually cued contextual response selection, but not for visual discrimination of contexts
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2012.00066
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sehee Kim, Jihyun Lee, Inah Lee

Abstract

The hippocampus is important for spatial navigation. Literature shows that allocentric visual contexts in the animal's background are critical for making conditional response selections during navigations. In a traditional maze task, however, it is difficult to identify exactly which subsets of visual contexts are critically used. In the current study, we tested in rats whether making conditional response selections required the hippocampus when using computer-generated visual contextual stimuli in the animal's background as in primate and human studies. We designed a new task, visual contextual response selection (VCRS) task, in which the rat ran along a linear track and encountered a touchscreen monitor at the end of the track. The rat was required to touch one of the adjacent rectangular box images depending on the visual contextual stimuli displayed in the two peripheral monitors positioned on both sides of the center touchscreen monitor. The rats with a GABA-A receptor agonist, muscimol (MUS), infused bilaterally in the dorsal hippocampi showed severe performance deficits in the VCRS task and the impairment was completely reversible with vehicle injections. The impairment in contextual response selection with hippocampal inactivations occurred regardless of whether the visual context was presented in the side monitors or in the center touchscreen monitor. However, when the same visual contextual stimuli were pitted against each other between the two side monitors and as the rats simply ran toward the visual context associated with reward on a T-shaped track, hippocampal inactivations with MUS showed minimal disruptions, if any, in performance. Our results suggest that the hippocampus is critically involved in conditional response selection using visual stimuli in the background, but it is not required for the perceptual discrimination of those stimuli.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 50 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 23%
Researcher 10 19%
Student > Master 10 19%
Other 4 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 8%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 4 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 33%
Psychology 11 21%
Neuroscience 7 13%
Engineering 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 8 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 May 2013.
All research outputs
#15,270,698
of 22,708,120 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#2,211
of 3,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,247
of 244,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#47
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,708,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,147 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 244,149 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.