000279932 001__ 279932
000279932 005__ 20250720001620.0
000279932 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1162/imag_a_00516
000279932 0247_ $$2altmetric$$aaltmetric:175037346
000279932 037__ $$aDZNE-2025-00863
000279932 082__ $$a610
000279932 1001_ $$0P:(DE-2719)2811255$$aChen, Xiaoli$$b0
000279932 245__ $$aRepresentational similarity analysis reveals cue-independent spatial representations for landmarks and self-motion cues in human retrosplenial cortex
000279932 260__ $$aCambridge, MA$$bMIT Press$$c2025
000279932 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000279932 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000279932 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1752752640_26697
000279932 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000279932 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000279932 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000279932 520__ $$aIt is a fundamental question in the spatial navigation literature how different spatial cues are unified to form a coherent spatial map of the space. Landmarks and self-motion cues are two major spatial cue types, which recruit relatively independent cognitive processes that dynamically interact with each other during navigation. In our previous studies, we developed two novel memory-dependent paradigms to contrast visual landmarks and visual self-motion cues in the desktop virtual reality environment. Participants visited the four test locations arranged evenly along a linear track in predetermined sequences. While at each test location, they performed a spatial judgment relying on memory. Using ultra-high field fMRI at 7 Tesla, we found that the human entorhinal cortex (EC) and retrosplenial cortex (RSC) exhibited cue-specific location-based spatial representations in the form of fMRI adaptation (fMRIa), meaning that the closer the two successively visited locations were to each other, the greater the suppression in the brain activation. In the current study, we re-analyzed the same fMRI datasets from our previous studies by performing the representational similarity analysis (RSA), an approach complementary to the fMRIa analysis in assessing neural representations. RSA’s rationale is that the closer two locations are to each other in the space, the more similar multi-voxel patterns of brain activation they should elicit. The results showed that RSC contained RSA-based neural representations of spatial locations for both landmarks and self-motion cues, which were overall driven by subjective response (participant’s self-reported location) instead of objective location (participant’s actual location). These representations were generalizable between the two cue types in terms of response, indicating cue-independent spatial representations. Combined with our previous finding of cue-specific fMRIa-based spatial representations in RSC, our study demonstrates the coexistence of cue-specific and cue-independent spatial representations in RSC. Our findings suggest that RSC plays a crucial role in unifying various spatial sensory inputs into coherent spatial representations, supporting memory-oriented navigation behavior.
000279932 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-353$$a353 - Clinical and Health Care Research (POF4-353)$$cPOF4-353$$fPOF IV$$x0
000279932 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, Journals: pub.dzne.de
000279932 7001_ $$aWei, Ziwei$$b1
000279932 7001_ $$0P:(DE-2719)2810583$$aWolbers, Thomas$$b2$$eLast author
000279932 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)3167925-0$$a10.1162/imag_a_00516$$gVol. 3, p. imag_a_00516$$pimag_a_00516$$tImaging neuroscience$$v3$$x2837-6056$$y2025
000279932 8564_ $$uhttps://pub.dzne.de/record/279932/files/DZNE-2025-00863.pdf$$yOpenAccess
000279932 8564_ $$uhttps://pub.dzne.de/record/279932/files/DZNE-2025-00863.pdf?subformat=pdfa$$xpdfa$$yOpenAccess
000279932 909CO $$ooai:pub.dzne.de:279932$$pdnbdelivery$$pdriver$$pVDB$$popen_access$$popenaire
000279932 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588)1065079516$$6P:(DE-2719)2810583$$aDeutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen$$b2$$kDZNE
000279932 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-353$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF4-350$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF4-300$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF4$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bGesundheit$$lNeurodegenerative Diseases$$vClinical and Health Care Research$$x0
000279932 9141_ $$y2025
000279932 915__ $$0LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBY4$$2HGFVOC$$aCreative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0
000279932 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0501$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ Seal$$d2024-09-26T09:40:26Z
000279932 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0500$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ$$d2024-09-26T09:40:26Z
000279932 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0510$$2StatID$$aOpenAccess
000279932 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bDOAJ : Anonymous peer review$$d2024-09-26T09:40:26Z
000279932 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0561$$2StatID$$aArticle Processing Charges$$d2025-01-02
000279932 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline$$d2025-01-02
000279932 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0700$$2StatID$$aFees$$d2025-01-02
000279932 9201_ $$0I:(DE-2719)1310002$$kAG Wolbers$$lAging, Cognition and Technology$$x0
000279932 980__ $$ajournal
000279932 980__ $$aVDB
000279932 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED
000279932 980__ $$aI:(DE-2719)1310002
000279932 9801_ $$aFullTexts