Abstract
THE ability to respond to unexpected stimuli (the 'orienting response') is a fundamental characteristic of mammalian behaviour1, but the brain mechanisms by which novelty is detected remain poorly defined. Electrophysiological recordings of scalp and intracranial event-related potentials (ERPs) have shown that novel stimuli activate a distributed network involving prefrontal and posterior association cortex2–6. In addition, ERP7,8 and single-neuron9,10 recordings, as well as neuroimaging11 and modelling12 studies, have suggested that temporal cortical regions, including the hippocampus, are also involved. To examine further the role of the medial temporal lobe in novelty processing, I measured physiological responses to novel auditory and tactile stimuli in patients with damage to the posterior hippocampal region. In normal control subjects, unexpected novel stimuli produce a characteristic ERP signal, accompanied by an autonomic skin response. Both responses are reduced in hippocampal lesion patients, whereas the response to expected control stimuli is unaffected. Thus the hippocampal region, in addition to its known role in memory formation, is an essential component of the distributed limbic–cortical network that detects and responds to novel stimuli.
This is a preview of subscription content
Access options
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
204,58 €
only 4,01 € per issue
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
$32.00
All prices are NET prices.
References
Sokolov, E. N. Annu. Rev. Physiol. 25, 545–580 (1963).
Knight, R. T. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol. 59, 9–20 (1984).
Knight, R. T., Scabini, D., Woods, D. L. & Clayworth, C. C. Brain Res. 502, 109–116 (1989).
Yamaguchi, S. & Knight, R. T. J. Neurosci. 11, 2039–2054 (1991).
Halgren, E. et al. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol. 94, 191–220 (1995).
Baudena, P., Halgren, E., Heit, G. & Clarke, J. M. Electroencephal. Clin. Neurophysiol. 94, 251–264 (1995).
Halgren, E. & Marinkovic, K. in The Cognitive Neurosciences (ed. Gazzaniga, M. S.) 1137–1151 (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995).
Scabini, D. & McCarthy, G. Soc. Neuroscience (abstr.) 19, 564 (1993).
Rolls, E. T., Cahusac, P. M. B., Feigenbaum, J. D. & Miyashita, Y. Exp. Brain Res. 93, 299–306 (1993).
Miller, E. K., Li, L. & Desimone, R. Science 254, 1377–1380 (1991).
Tulving, E., Markowitsch, H. J., Craik, F. I. M., Habib, R. & Houle, S. Cerebral Cortex 6, 71–79 (1996).
Metcalfe, J. Psychol. Rev. 100, 3–22 (1993).
Squires, N. K., Squires, K. C. & Hillyard, S. A. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol. 83, 387–401 (1975).
Courchesne, E., Hillyard, S. A. & Galambos, R. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol. 39, 131–143 (1975).
Polich, J. & Squires, L. R. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol. 86, 408–417 (1993).
Onofrj, M. et al. Neurology 42, 1762–1767 (1992).
Treves, A. & Rolls, E. T. Hippocampus 4, 374–391 (1994).
von Restorff, H. Psychol. Forsch. 18, 299–342 (1933).
Karis, D., Fabiani, M. & Donchin, E. Cogn. Psychol. 16, 177–216 (1984).
Goldman-Rakic, P. S., Selemon, L. D. & Schwartz, M. L. Neuroscience 12, 719–743 (1984).
Van Hoesen, G. W., Morecraft, R. J. & Semendeferi, K. in Neuropsychiatry (eds Fogel, B. S., Schiffer, R. B. & Rao, S. M.) 113–143 (Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, 1996).
Friedman, H. R. & Goldman-Rakic, P. S. J. Neurosci. 14, 2775–2788 (1994).
Risold, P. Y. & Swanson, L. W. Science 272, 1484–1486 (1996).
Eichenbaum, H., Otto, T. & Cohen, N. Behav. Brain Sci. 17, 449–518 (1994).
Richardson, B. C., Eberling, J. C., Knight, R. T. & Jagust, W. J. Neurology 42, 170 (1992).
De Renzi, E., Zambolin, A. & Crisi, G. Brain 110, 1099–1116 (1987).
von Cramon, D. Y., Hebel, N. & Schuri, U. Brain 111, 1061–1077 (1988).
Woods, D. L., Knight, R. T. & Scabini, D. Cogn. Brain Res. 1, 227–240 (1993).
Renault, B., Ragot, R., Lesevre, N. & Remond A. Science 215, 1413–1415 (1982).
Gutrecht, J. A. J. Clin. Neurophysiol. 11, 519–524 (1994).
Author information
Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Knight, R. Contribution of human hippocampal region to novelty detection. Nature 383, 256–259 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1038/383256a0
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/383256a0
Further reading
-
Learning task-state representations
Nature Neuroscience (2019)
-
Event-related potentials evoked by passive visuospatial perception in rats and humans reveal common denominators in information processing
Brain Structure and Function (2019)
-
Operation of a P300-based brain-computer interface in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy
Scientific Reports (2018)
-
Low-Frequency Oscillatory Correlates of Auditory Predictive Processing in Cortical-Subcortical Networks: A MEG-Study
Scientific Reports (2018)
-
Hippocampus-driven feed-forward inhibition of the prefrontal cortex mediates relapse of extinguished fear
Nature Neuroscience (2018)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.