The Hippocampus Supports High-Resolution Binding in the Service of Perception, Working Memory and Long-Term Memory

Yonelinas · Behavioural brain research · 2013 · neuroscience · 10.1016/j.bbr.2013.05.030 · record Yonelinas2013-the-hippocampus-supports-high-resolution-bin
tag layer · index · concepts · authors · עברית

Where this record's text came from. faceted 2026-08 by reading the locally held text (xml); every evidence string verified as an exact substring of that text before merging. The paper is a theoretical review, so claim type is the shape of the proposed account rather than of a new experiment; 'mechanism' is used because the proposal specifies why hippocampal damage impairs some tasks and not others (the high-resolution binding demand). Replication status is 'contested' on the paper's own statement that the underlying findings are disputed: it notes that studies of hippocampal involvement in working memory and perception 'have been highly controversial because other similar studies have failed to find evidence for hippocampal involvement'. Several studies it leans on are cited as in preparation or under review, which the substring rule cannot capture. 2026-08-13 and 2026-08-15 schema-0.3 passes: every quote verified as an exact substring of the staged text and anchored at merge time; concept terms verified present; every edge endpoint an existing node.

This record’s own method is review, and the tags below follow from that. A review’s findings, quantities and statistics are things stated IN this paper, and some of them report results obtained elsewhere. No tag on this page names a different author. Measured across every review in this corpus, 81% of a review’s tags carry no citation at all — most of them are the review speaking. The corpus does not adjudicate the rest: read an unmarked tag as a claim this paper makes, not necessarily one it made first.

How to read this page. The article itself is not reproduced here — this paper is not cleared for redistribution, so what follows is the tag layer alone. The evidence sentences are withheld with the article. The table at the foot lists every tag the record carries; each row names the facet it belongs to, and the whose words column says whether the tag records the paper's own wording or the tagger's sentence about the paper. Every tag links to each other paper in the corpus carrying it. The machine-readable edition of the same thing is the TEI file beside this one, where the tags live in standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.

Other fields define these differently the same word, defined another way in another discipline
precision 10 fields · working memory 4 fields · perception 3 fields · ROC 2 fields · binding 2 fields · familiarity 2 fields

Tags on this paper

Every tag the record carries, each linking to every other paper in the corpus that carries it. A tag appears here whether or not its words occur in the article — the spans below are only the ones a sentence in this paper licenses. Of the 25 concept tags on this paper, none is grounded in a quoted sentence. All carry the tagger's gloss of what the term means in this paper, which is not something the article can license.

hippocampus high-resolution low-resolution recollection familiarity working memory perception long-term memory binding state-based strength-based ROC response criterion feature search configural precision capacity color wheel perirhinal cortex CLS pattern separation oddity judgment perceptual matching scenes digit span Over long delays only the hippocampus can hold complex high-resolution bindings, so its necessity grows as the delay lengthens and other cortical stores drop out Cortical perceptual binding regions lose their representations as delay grows, presumably through interference from incoming sensory input, shifting the load onto the hippocampus The participant's strategy determines hippocampal recruitment: a single-feature search bypasses high-resolution hippocampal representations, whereas configural matching requires them Pattern separation in dentate gyrus and CA3 rapidly builds distinct representations of complex configurations, the substrate the account requires familiarity-based recognition receiver operating characteristics strength-based perception receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis The confidence data were used to plot receiver operating characteristics (ROCs) signal detection model fit (unequal variance model) the unequal variance signal detection model review

Legend

second reading	`alternatives`	an independent re-reading of a facet, recorded whether or not it agrees
relation to other work	`claim_relations`	how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies
claim type	`claim_type`	the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null
concept edge	`concept_edges`	an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it
content tag	`content_tags`	a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper
contribution	`contribution`	what the paper claims to add
limitation	`limitations`	what the paper says its evidence cannot support
mechanism	`mechanisms`	how the reported effect is said to come about
method	`method`	how the paper produced its evidence
object of study	`object_of_study`	what the paper is about — the thing it investigates
phenomenon	`phenomenon`	the effect or regularity under study
research question	`research_question`	the question the paper sets itself
sense	`senses`	a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it
transfer	`transfers`	a method or concept carried in from another field

The paper

The full text is not reproduced here. This article is not cleared for redistribution, so the page carries the tag layer only. Its evidence sentences are withheld; the grounding status remains with each tag, and the article itself is at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2013.05.030. The reading view exists for the papers whose licence permits it.

Every tag on this page

alternatives 3 · claim_relations 11 · claim_type 1 · concept_edges 10 · content_tags 56 · contribution 1 · limitations 7 · mechanisms 8 · method 1 · object_of_study 1 · phenomenon 1 · research_question 1 · senses 6 · transfers 2

Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 10 relations here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.

This record holds no controls. A layer is empty when the tagger recorded nothing in it — which is not the same as the paper having nothing to record.

facet	tag	field	conf.	whose words
object_of_study	why hippocampal patients are impaired on some working memory and perception tasks and not on others that look the same Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`object_of_study`		the paper's words
research_question	whether the hippocampus supports complex high-resolution associative information across memory, working memory and perception Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`research_question`		the paper's words
contribution	the discriminating variable is resolution, not association: hippocampal damage impairs tasks needing complex high-resolution bindings and spares those needing only low-resolution ones Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`contribution`		the paper's words
claim_type	mechanism Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_type`		the paper's words
phenomenon	hippocampal high-resolution binding Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`phenomenon`		the paper's words
method	review Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: review	`method`		the paper's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Over long delays only the hippocampus can hold complex high-resolution bindings, so its necessity grows as the delay lengthens and other cortical stores drop out	`mechanisms[0]`		the tagger's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Cortical perceptual binding regions lose their representations as delay grows, presumably through interference from incoming sensory input, shifting the load onto the hippocampus	`mechanisms[1]`		the tagger's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: The participant's strategy determines hippocampal recruitment: a single-feature search bypasses high-resolution hippocampal representations, whereas configural matching requires them	`mechanisms[2]`		the tagger's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. duplicate of: mechanisms[4] also in: Pattern separation in dentate gyrus and CA3 rapidly builds distinct representations of complex configurations, the substrate the account requires	`mechanisms[3]`		the tagger's words
mechanisms	pattern separation in dentate gyrus and CA3 allows rapid formation of distinct representations for complex configurations, which is the neurobiological form of the proposal Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`mechanisms[4]`	1.0	the tagger's words
mechanisms	the same representations should be available without any long delay, which is why they could serve working memory and perception too Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`mechanisms[5]`	0.8	the tagger's words
mechanisms	over short delays other cortical mechanisms can hold such bindings, so the hippocampal contribution only becomes visible as the delay grows Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`mechanisms[6]`	1.0	the tagger's words
mechanisms	the domain matters as well as the resolution: simple associations need the hippocampus in long-term memory but not in working memory, and in perception only complex materials do Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`mechanisms[7]`	1.0	the tagger's words
limitations	The account does not address semantic or remote long-term memory. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the scope of the account: HOW THE CURRENT IDEAS RELATE TO SEMANTIC LONG-TERM MEMORY OR REMOTE MEMORY is not addressed	`limitations[0]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The supporting computational simulations are preliminary and not yet shown to cover the working memory and perceptual literature. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the computational support: FUTURE WORK WILL BE NECESSARY TO DETERMINE IF THE SAME MODEL PARAMETERS ARE CAPABLE OF ACCURATELY ACCOUNTING FOR OTHER ASPECTS OF THE WORKING MEMORY AND PERCEPTUAL LITERATURE	`limitations[1]`		the tagger's words
limitations	Whether recollection in working memory can occur without the hippocampus is only indirectly supported. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the hippocampal-dependence claim for working-memory recollection: THE EXISTING RESULTS ARE NOT YET ENTIRELY CLEAR, BUT THERE IS INDIRECT EVIDENCE THAT RECOLLECTION IN WORKING MEMORY CAN ARISE INDEPENDENTLY OF THE HIPPOCAMPUS	`limitations[2]`		the tagger's words
limitations	whether high-resolution semantic or remote memories depend on the hippocampus is stated to be unclear, and they differ in being learned gradually Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the same scope as limitations[0], with the difficulty named: INDIVIDUALS CAN ALSO DEVELOP HIGH-RESOLUTION SEMANTIC OR REMOTE MEMORIES, which the account does not cover	`limitations[3]`	1.0	the tagger's words
limitations	there is indirect evidence that recollection in working memory can arise without the hippocampus, which the account does not yet explain Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the same scope as limitations[2] - the evidence against hippocampal necessity here is indirect	`limitations[4]`	1.0	the tagger's words
limitations	whether expertise turns a high-resolution feature into a low-resolution one is raised as an open question Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the high/low resolution distinction itself: WHETHER EXPERTISE CAN INFLUENCE WHETHER A STIMULUS CHARACTERISTIC IS PROCESSED AS A HIGH OR LOW-RESOLUTION FEATURE is open	`limitations[5]`	1.0	the tagger's words
limitations	one supporting study is cited with the note that it provided no statistical comparisons Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the small-set-size evidence specifically: Quotation withheld (EXPERIMENT 2, ALTHOUGH NOTE THAT NO STATISTICAL COMPARISONS WERE PROVIDED)	`limitations[6]`	1.0	the tagger's words
transfers	receiver operating characteristics used to split a perceptual judgement into two processes rather than score it as one Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`transfers[0]`	1.0	the tagger's words
transfers	the continuous colour wheel, which separates precision from capacity where an accuracy score cannot Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`transfers[1]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	ASSOCIATIVE is the wrong key: the literature disagrees when studies are grouped by whether a task requires associations, because patients often pass low-resolution associative tests Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[0]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	HIGH-RESOLUTION is the proposed replacement key, and the paper's whole evidence is that regrouping the same studies by it removes the contradiction Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[1]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	a test of associative memory is not a process-pure measure of recollection, because familiarity and implicit memory can carry simple associations too Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[2]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	the same task can require the hippocampus or not depending on the STRATEGY the participant adopts - feature search needs no high-resolution representation, configural matching does Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[3]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	whether a study finds an impairment at all can depend on the participants' response criterion, which binary same/different designs never measure Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[4]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	the deficit is in PRECISION, not capacity: patients remember roughly which colour, and not exactly which - so an accuracy score conflates two things the account separates Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[5]`	1.0	the tagger's words
alternatives	claim_type: critique Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading DIFFERING from the recorded value. Recorded: mechanism — note: a second reading, verbatim-verified, disagreeing with the value on the record. Not applied - a person decides.	`alternatives.claim_type`		the tagger's words
alternatives	method: review Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading reaching the same value. Recorded: review — note: a second reading reaching the same value from a different sentence. Not applied - a person decides.	`alternatives.method`		the tagger's words
alternatives	phenomenon: hippocampal patients failing and passing structurally similar associative tasks in different studies Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading DIFFERING from the recorded value. Recorded: hippocampal high-resolution binding — note: a second reading, verbatim-verified, disagreeing with the value on the record. Not applied - a person decides.	`alternatives.phenomenon`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	builds-on → dual-process models of recollection and familiarity (Atkinson & Juola, 1974; Yonelinas 1994) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[0]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	extends → relational/binding models of hippocampal function (Cohen, Poldrack & Eichenbaum, 1997; Eichenbaum, Ranganath & Yonelinas, 2007) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[1]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	contradicts → traditional memory-systems models in which the MTL is specialised for long-term memory (Squire, 1994; Schacter & Tulving, 1984; Tulving, 1982) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: THE AXIS IS THE PRINCIPLE OF DIVISION. The models contradicted 'assume that the MTL is specialized for long-term memory whereas other cortical systems are responsible for working memory and perception' - a division by PROCESS. The current approach divides by representational resolution instead, so the same MTL findings are partitioned differently rather than disputed.	`claim_relations[2]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	contradicts → accounts of a selective hippocampal role in spatial processing (Lee et al. 2005; O'Keefe & Nadel, 1978) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[3]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	contradicts → the claim that the hippocampus is required for any relational information or association (Konkel, Warren, Duff, Tranel, & Cohen, 2008) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: the RESOLUTION of the association, not its existence: NOT THAT THE HIPPOCAMPUS IS NECESSARY FOR ANY TYPE OF RELATIONAL INFORMATION OR ASSOCIATION, BUT RATHER THAT IT WILL BE PARTICULARLY CRITICAL FOR HIGH-RESOLUTION ASSOCIATIONS	`claim_relations[4]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	contradicts → the account in which the hippocampus is necessary for relational or associative information as such Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: the RESOLUTION of the association: A SIMPLE RELATIONAL OR ASSOCIATIVE ACCOUNT IN AND OF ITSELF is not what is claimed - the division is high-resolution against low	`claim_relations[5]`	1.0	the tagger's words
claim_relations	contradicts → memory systems models in which the medial temporal lobe is specialised for long-term memory while other systems handle working memory and perception Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: what the hippocampus is a component OF: THE CURRENT THEORY SUGGESTS THAT THE HIPPOCAMPUS IS NOT JUST A COMPONENT OF A SPECIALIZED LONG-TERM MEMORY SYSTEM, BUT RATHER IT SUPPORTS HIGH-RESOLUTION BINDINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT FOR LONG-TERM MEMORY AS WELL AS WORKING MEMORY AND PERCEPTION - the older models divide by TIMESCALE, this one by RESOLUTION	`claim_relations[6]`	1.0	the tagger's words
claim_relations	contradicts → accounts assigning the hippocampus a selective role in spatial processing Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: whether the material is spatial: ALTHOUGH SPACE/SCENE INFORMATION OFTEN DOES RELY ON COMPLEX HIGH-RESOLUTION ASSOCIATIVE INFORMATION... THE ROLE OF THE HIPPOCAMPUS IS NOT EXPECTED TO BE LIMITED TO TASKS THAT INVOLVE SPATIAL MATERIALS - space is a special case of resolution, not the criterion	`claim_relations[7]`	1.0	the tagger's words
claim_relations	reconciles → studies reporting hippocampal deficits in associative working memory and studies reporting none Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: which binding tasks: IT IS NOT SIMPLY THAT THE HIPPOCAMPUS IS NECESSARY FOR WORKING MEMORY TASKS THAT REQUIRE BINDING OR ASSOCIATIVE INFORMATION BECAUSE NOT ALL TASKS THAT REQUIRE BINDING ARE DISRUPTED BY HIPPOCAMPAL DAMAGE	`claim_relations[8]`	1.0	the tagger's words
claim_relations	builds-on → dual-process models of recollection and familiarity Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[9]`	0.9	the tagger's words
claim_relations	supports → the Complementary Learning Systems model's account of pattern separation in dentate gyrus and CA3 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[10]`	0.9	the tagger's words
concept_edges	high-resolution —contrasted-with→ low-resolution Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 · note: THE PROPOSED JOIN KEY. Regrouping the same patient studies on this distinction is the paper's entire evidence also in: high-resolution · low-resolution	`concept_edges[0]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concept_edges	recollection —contrasted-with→ familiarity Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 · note: CRITERION: whether specific qualitative details come back, or only a sense of having seen it before also in: recollection · familiarity	`concept_edges[3]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concept_edges	state-based —contrasted-with→ strength-based Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 · note: CRITERION: whether the observer can say WHAT differed, or only that something did also in: state-based · strength-based	`concept_edges[6]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concept_edges	feature search —contrasted-with→ configural Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: THE AXIS IS WHETHER ONE FEATURE SUFFICES. 'in the perceptual matching task, the materials have been such that Quotation withheld [configuration].' The axis is a property of THE MATERIALS, not of the subjects or the task name - which is why a null on such a task is not evidence about configural processing. · strength of the relation: 1 · note: STRATEGY, NOT TASK: the same materials engage the hippocampus or not depending on how the participant chooses to solve them also in: feature search · configural	`concept_edges[10]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concept_edges	precision —distinct-from→ capacity Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: THE AXIS IS PRECISION AGAINST CAPACITY. 'Quotation withheld' Both are ways of being worse at a memory task and a summary score cannot tell them apart - so a deficit reported without this distinction is compatible with two different accounts of what the hippocampus does. Cowan2008 in this corpus reports the same literature unable to decide whether its limit is time or capacity; here a third quantity is separated from capacity by measurement. · strength of the relation: 1 · note: the patients keep the second and lose the first, which an overall accuracy score would merge also in: precision · capacity	`concept_edges[11]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concept_edges	color wheel —operationalised-as→ precision Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but a color-wheel task measured precision; operationalised-as is loose. also in: color wheel · precision	`concept_edges[12]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concept_edges	pattern separation —part-of→ CLS Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the CLS model 'assumes' the pattern-separation abilities of DG and CA3; part-of is loose. also in: pattern separation · CLS	`concept_edges[13]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concept_edges	perceptual matching —causes→ feature search Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.8 · note: the task's materials permitted a single-feature solution, which is the proposed reason its results conflict Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the matching task's materials ALLOW a feature-search strategy; causes is loose. also in: perceptual matching · feature search	`concept_edges[15]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concept_edges	digit span —distinct-from→ high-resolution Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 · note: so its long-standing preservation in amnesia is a PREDICTION of the account rather than an anomaly for it Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but digit span requires 'neither associative nor high-resolution information'; distinct-from is loose. also in: digit span · high-resolution	`concept_edges[16]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concept_edges	working memory —contrasted-with→ long-term memory Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: THE AXIS IS WHETHER THE HIPPOCAMPUS IS REQUIRED FOR A SIMPLE ASSOCIATION. 'Quotation withheld.' The same associative content is involved on both sides; what changes is whether the structure is needed to hold it - a claim about the memory system rather than about the material. · strength of the relation: 1 · note: the same resolution demand has different consequences in each, because over short delays other regions can carry the binding also in: working memory · long-term memory	`concept_edges[17]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis	`content_tags.statistics[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	signal detection model fit (unequal variance model) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: signal detection model fit (unequal variance model)	`content_tags.statistics[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	receiver operating characteristics Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: receiver operating characteristics	`content_tags.statistics[2]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	Reviewing the patient literature, hippocampal damage impairs perception and working memory precisely on tasks demanding complex high-resolution bindings. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Hippocampal damage is much less likely to impair tasks that need only low-resolution or simple associations. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	In working memory, hippocampal damage reduced the precision of the memories rather than the number of items retained. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	In a same/different scene task the patients' perceptual deficit was confined to strength-based (relational match) responses, while state-based responses using local feature detail were intact. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	In healthy participants, hippocampal fMRI activation scaled linearly with strength-based perceptual confidence and showed no extra rise for state-based responses. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[4]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Merely requiring an association does not predict hippocampal involvement, since some object-colour associative working memory tasks are performed normally after hippocampal damage. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[5]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Hippocampal involvement is not restricted to complex scene material: precise colour memory for coloured squares also depends on the hippocampus. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[6]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	The threshold of complexity at which the hippocampus becomes necessary differs across domains: simple associations need it in long-term memory but not in working memory. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[7]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	In long-term memory, selective hippocampal damage removes recollection while leaving familiarity-based recognition intact. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[8]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	At a one-second delay hippocampal patients failed on object-location pairings while remaining normal for the objects and the locations on their own. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[9]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	THE LITERATURE CONTRADICTS ITSELF: some studies find hippocampal deficits on associative working memory tasks and others using similar procedures find none Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[10]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	Olsen's object-location task showed a deficit at a 1 second delay for pairings but not for objects or locations alone Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[11]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	patient Jon performed normally on colour, shape, colour-shape and object-spoken-name working memory Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[12]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	the early-damage objection to that case was answered by patients damaged later in life showing the same preservation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[13]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	THE OLD KEY FAILS: requiring binding is not sufficient to predict a hippocampal deficit, because not all binding tasks are disrupted Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[14]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	the tasks that found nothing may not have drawn heavily on high-resolution binding; studies requiring precise object locations do show a hippocampal role Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[15]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	CEILING EXCLUDED EXPLICITLY: preservation held across set sizes and therefore across a range of performance Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[16]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	the tasks were designed to be equally hard for controls, so patient-control differences could not reflect difficulty or ceiling Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[17]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	A CITED STUDY FLAGGED: one supporting result is reported with the note that no statistical comparisons were provided Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[18]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	patients' location errors were small displacements rather than random, so the memory was present but less precise Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[19]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	PRECISION NOT CAPACITY: patients were no less likely to remember a colour, but when they did their memory was less precise Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[20]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	and the effect appears with simple coloured squares, so the hippocampal role is not limited to complex scenes Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[21]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	in oddity judgement hippocampal patients were impaired for scenes but not objects, faces or colours Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[22]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	perceptual matching results conflict: some studies find scene deficits and others find normal performance on the same task Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[23]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION IS STRATEGY: if the materials allow a single-feature solution the hippocampus is not needed, if they force configural matching it is Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[24]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	perceptual judgements split into a discrete state with access to specific details and a graded strength of overall match Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[25]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	the patients' deficit was confined to the strength-based half and left the state-based half untouched Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[26]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	and hippocampal activation in healthy imaging tracked strength-based perception linearly without rising for state-based Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[27]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	AN ARTEFACT THAT COULD DECIDE A LITERATURE: with a strict response criterion the same data would show no impairment, with a liberal one a significant impairment Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[28]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	the shortcoming named in earlier perception work is that it measured perception as a unitary phenomenon Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[29]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	the account is distinguished from a relational one: patients often pass associative tests needing only low-resolution associations Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[30]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	and from memory-systems models that confine the medial temporal lobe to long-term memory Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[31]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	and from spatial accounts: the role of the hippocampus is not expected to be limited to tasks that involve spatial materials Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[32]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	the allocentric-versus-egocentric debate is recast as a question about how many bindings a task demands Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[33]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	the hippocampus is proposed to be unique over long delays; as the delay shortens, other cortical processes can support performance, at least temporarily Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[34]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	digit span requires neither association nor resolution, so its preservation in amnesia is predicted rather than anomalous Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[35]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	A PROGRAMME FOR RE-EXAMINING OLD NULLS: earlier studies that found no deficit are worth rerunning with higher resolution demands Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[36]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	the unifying principle proposed is the demand for representing, maintaining and retrieving complex high-resolution bindings Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[37]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	familiarity-based recognition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: familiarity-based recognition	`content_tags.definitions[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	familiarity Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: familiarity	`content_tags.definitions[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	receiver operating characteristics Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: receiver operating characteristics	`content_tags.definitions[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	strength-based perception Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: strength-based perception	`content_tags.definitions[4]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	recollection Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: recollection	`content_tags.definitions[6]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	state-based Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: state-based	`content_tags.definitions[7]`	0.85	the tagger's words
content_tags	CLS Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: CLS	`content_tags.definitions[8]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	high-resolution Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: high-resolution	`content_tags.definitions[9]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	high-resolution Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: high-resolution	`content_tags.variables[2]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	precision Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: precision	`content_tags.variables[3]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	response criterion Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: response criterion	`content_tags.variables[4]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	2, 3 and 4 items — the small set sizes at which hippocampal patients were already impaired on precise object placement Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	180 ms to 1.5 seconds — range of stimulus presentation rates over which the same/different perception results replicated Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	4 colored squares for 250 ms, followed by a 1 s blank screen — stimulus timing of the colour-wheel working memory task used with hippocampal patients Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	1 to 7 objects — set sizes in the precise-placement task where patients failed from two items up Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[3]`	0.8	the tagger's words

Interpretive choices

Tags that could not be placed in the text:

none — every tag was located in the text

What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.