1. Downloaded from rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org on 6 October 2009
On the nature of medial temporal lobe contributions to the
constructive simulation of future events
Daniel L. Schacter and Donna Rose Addis
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 2009 364, 1245-1253
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2008.0308
References This article cites 49 articles, 10 of which can be accessed free
http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/364/1521/1245.full.html#ref-list-1
Rapid response Respond to this article
http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/letters/submit/royptb;364/1521/1245
Subject collections Articles on similar topics can be found in the following collections
neuroscience (226 articles)
Email alerting service Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article - sign up in the box at the top
right-hand corner of the article or click here
To subscribe to Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B go to: http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/subscriptions
This journal is © 2009 The Royal Society

2. Downloaded from rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org on 6 October 2009
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B (2009) 364, 1245–1253
doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0308
On the nature of medial temporal lobe
contributions to the constructive
simulation of future events
Daniel L. Schacter1,2,* and Donna Rose Addis3
1
Department of Psychology, Harvard University, 33 Kirkland Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
2
Athinoula A Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital,
Charlestown, MA 02129, USA
3
Department of Psychology, University of Auckland, Auckland 1142, New Zealand
A rapidly growing number of studies indicate that imagining or simulating possible future events
depends on much of the same neural machinery as does remembering past events. One especially
striking finding is that the medial temporal lobe (MTL), which has long been linked to memory
function, appears to be similarly engaged during future event simulation. This paper focuses on
the role of two MTL regions—the hippocampus and parahippocampal cortex—in thinking about the
future and building mental simulations.
Keywords: memory; mental simulation; future thinking; hippocampus; medial temporal lobe;
parahippocampal cortex
1. INTRODUCTION there were also strong commonalities between remem-
Everyday experience suggests that predictions are bering the past and imagining the future. Positive past
about the future, whereas memory is about the past. and future events were rated as more strongly experi-
From this perspective, the two phenomena run on enced than negative past and future events, temporally
parallel tracks in opposite temporal directions. For close events in either the past or future were more
example, predictions about the future occur at varying strongly experienced and included more sensory and
different time scales, ranging from situations where one contextual details than did distant events, and partici-
enters a new setting, such as a school or a museum, and pants were more likely to adopt a first-person than third-
tries to predict what might happen next (e.g. Bar person perspective for temporally close than temporally
2007), all the way to predicting how happy one might distant events in both the past and the future.
be years or decades in the future in a marriage or a job These commonalities in cognitive processes under-
(Gilbert 2006). Analogously, memory can operate on lying past and future events are complemented by
the very recent past, as when we use working memory analogous similarities in brain activity: the same ‘core
to recall the last few words in a sentence, or the remote network’ of brain regions is recruited when people
past, as when we recall our childhood experiences. remember the past and imagine the future, including
It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that medial prefrontal and frontopolar cortex, medial
predicting the future and remembering the past may be temporal lobe (MTL), lateral temporal and tempor-
more closely related than everyday experience might opolar cortex, medial parietal cortex including pos-
suggest. For example, errors in predicting the future are terior cingulate and retrosplenial cortex, and lateral
often based on how we remember the past (for a review, parietal cortex (for reviews, see Schacter et al. (2007,
see Gilbert & Wilson 2007). In a related vein, 2008) and Buckner et al. (2008)). For memory
remembering the past recruits many of the same cognitive researchers, perhaps the most striking finding from
processes as does imagining or simulating the occurrence this research is that the MTL, a structure long known
of possible events in the future. Consider, for example, to play a critical role in remembering, appears to be
a study by D’Argembeau & Van der Linden (2004), in similarly involved when individuals imagine or simulate
which they asked subjects to either remember a specific events that might occur in their personal futures.
event from their past or imagine a specific event that The purpose of the present paper is to review recent
could plausibly happen to them in the future, and rate evidence from our laboratory and others that links
various attributes of the event. Although remembered MTL activity to future event simulation, to consider
past events were associated with more vivid sensory and alternative interpretations of these observations, and to
contextual details than were imagined future events, discuss them in relation to other evidence concerning
the MTL and constructive memory. Elsewhere, we
have provided broad reviews concerning cognitive and
* Author and address for correspondence: Department of Psychol-
ogy, Harvard University, 33 Kirkland Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, neural aspects of future event simulation (Schacter et al.
USA (dls@wjh.harvard.edu). 2007, 2008), and focus here instead on the contri-
One contribution of 18 to a Theme Issue ‘Predictions in the brain: butions of two regions within the MTL, the hippo-
using our past to prepare for the future’. campus and parahippocampal cortex.
1245 This journal is q 2009 The Royal Society

3. Downloaded from rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org on 6 October 2009
1246 D. L. Schacter & D. R. Addis Constructive simulation of future events
2. REMEMBERING THE PAST AND IMAGINING years), or the near or distant future (the next few days
THE FUTURE: CONCEPTUAL ISSUES AND or years). These critical conditions were compared with
THE CONSTRUCTIVE EPISODIC a semantic control task involving analysis of the
SIMULATION HYPOTHESIS meaning of words. Compared with the control
When we use such terms as ‘episodic simulation’ or condition, significant levels of activation were observed
‘future event simulation’, we refer to imaginative during both the past and future conditions in the right
constructions of hypothetical events or scenarios that might hippocampus and bilateral parahippocampal cortex.
occur in one’s personal future (Schacter et al. 2008). Furthermore, two left parahippocampal areas showed
Although we focus on the idea that simulation is critical greater activity when individuals were thinking about
for envisaging possible future events, we do not restrict the future than about the past. Moreover, activity in a
our application of simulation to the future. People also number of these MTL regions was modulated by
engage in simulations of present and past events, temporal distance. Most of them showed the same
a point that will be important to consider in relation to neural response to temporal distance for both the past
recent empirical observations and theoretical accounts. and future events: either increasing or decreasing
Motivated in part by some of the striking common- activity with increasing temporal distance. The only
alities noted earlier between remembering past events region that exhibited an interaction between temporal
and simulating future ones, we advanced the constructive direction (i.e. past versus future) and distance (i.e. near
episodic simulation hypothesis (Schacter & Addis versus distant) was an inferior region in the left
2007a,b; for related views, see Suddendorf & Corballis parahippocampus gyrus (BA 36), one of the two areas
1997, 2007; Buckner & Carroll 2007; Hassabis & noted above that showed greater activity for future than
Maguire 2007). By this view, past and future events past events. In this region, Okuda et al. noted that the
draw on similar information stored in episodic memory increase in brain activity from the near to distant future
and rely on similar underlying processes: episodic tasks was smaller than the increase in activity observed
memory supports the construction of future events by from the near to distant past tasks.
extracting and recombining stored information into a These observations are potentially important
simulation of a novel event. Indeed, we have suggested because they suggest that the parahippocampal and
that simulation of future events requires a system that hippocampal regions are at least as active during future
can flexibly recombine details from past events. event simulation as during remembering of past
Taking an adaptive perspective, we (Schacter & experiences. Note, however, that because Okuda et al.
Addis 2007a,b) suggested that a critical function of a used a relatively unconstrained paradigm that did not
constructive memory is to make information available probe participants about particular events, it is unclear
for simulation of future events. Episodic memory thus whether these reports consisted of episodic memories/
supports the construction of future events by flexibly simulations (unique events specific in time and place),
recombining stored information into a simulation of a or general semantic information about an individual’s
novel event. The adaptive value of such a system is that past or future. More recent functional magnetic
it enables past information to be used flexibly in resonance imaging (fMRI) studies have used event-
simulating alternative future scenarios without enga- related designs to yield information regarding the
ging in actual behaviour. A potential downside of such neural bases of specific past and future events.
a system is that it is vulnerable to memory errors, such Addis et al. (2007) used event-related fMRI to
as misattribution and false recognition (e.g. Schacter & distinguish between an initial construction phase, where
Addis 2007a,b; see also Suddendorf & Corballis 1997; participants generated a specific past or future event in
Dudai & Carruthers 2005). response to an event cue (e.g. ‘dress’), making a button
With respect to the MTL, it has been suggested that press when they had an event in mind, and an
the hippocampal region supports relational memory elaboration phase during which participants generated
processes that link together disparate bits of infor- as much detail as possible about the event. We
mation (e.g. Eichenbaum & Cohen 2001). According compared activity during the past and future tasks
to the constructive episodic simulation hypothesis, with control tasks that required semantic and imagery
these processes are crucial for recombining stored processing, respectively.
information into future event simulations. Thus, our We observed evidence of past- and future-related
hypothesis posits an important link between hippo- MTL activities during both the construction and
campal activity and the simulation of future events. elaboration phases. The construction phase was
associated with common past–future activity in the
posterior left hippocampus, which we suggested might
3. NEUROIMAGING OF PAST AND reflect the initial interaction between cues and hippo-
FUTURE EVENTS campally mediated pointers to memory traces. Simi-
A large number of neuroimaging studies have larly, the elaboration phase revealed evidence of
examined brain activity when people remember past common past–future activity in the left hippocampus,
autobiographical experiences (for reviews, see Svoboda possibly reflecting the retrieval and/or integration of
et al. (2006) and Cabeza & St Jacques (2007)). additional event details into the memorial or imaginal
By contrast, only a handful of studies have explored representations, as well as common past–future activity
brain activity when people imagine future events. in the bilateral parahippocampal cortex. There was also
Okuda et al. (2003) reported the first such study. evidence for differential engagement of MTL activity in
During scanning, participants talked freely for 60 s the future task: during the construction phase, a region
about either the near or distant past (last few days or of the right hippocampus showed increased activity
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B (2009)

4. Downloaded from rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org on 6 October 2009
Constructive simulation of future events D. L. Schacter & D. R. Addis 1247
only in the future condition. We suggested that this differentially to the amount of detail comprising future
future-specific hippocampal activity might reflect the events, possibly reflecting the recombination of details
novelty of future events and/or additional relational into a novel future event.
processing required when one must recombine dis- The parametric modulation analysis of temporal
parate details into a coherent event. distance revealed that the increasing recency of past
Botzung et al. (2008) reported fMRI data that events was associated with activity in the right
contrast with the aforementioned results showing parahippocampus gyrus (BA 35/36), while activity in
increased hippocampal activity for future versus past the bilateral hippocampus was associated with the
events. One day prior to scanning, subjects described increasing remoteness of future events. We proposed
20 past events from the last week and 20 future events that the hippocampal response to the distance of future
planned for the next week. The subjects constructed events reflects the increasing disparateness of details
cue words for these events that were then presented to probably included in remote future events, and the
them the next day during scanning, when they were intensive relational processing required for integrating
instructed to think of past or future events to each cue. such details into a coherent episodic simulation of
Although past and future events produced activation in the future. Overall, these results suggest that, although
a similar network to that reported by Okuda et al. MTL regions supporting past and future event
(2003) and Addis et al. (2007), including bilateral simulation show impressive commonalities during
MTL, Botzung et al. reported no evidence for increased event elaboration, they can be recruited in different
activity in the future condition compared with the past ways depending on whether the generated event is in
condition. In fact, they noted that both the right and the past or future.
left hippocampus showed greater activity in the past A study by Addis et al. (2008a) provides additional
condition than in the future condition. insight into the nature of MTL activity during the
As we have pointed out elsewhere (Schacter et al. construction phase. Participants were cued to either
2008), however, participants in the Botzung et al. remember specific past events or imagine specific future
(2008) study initially carried out their simulations of events, as in Addis et al. (2007). In addition, they were
future events in a separate session prior to scanning, also cued to remember general routine events (e.g. having
they thus may have recalled their prior simulation brunch after attending church) or to imagine generic
during scanning, rather than constructing it for the first events that might occur in their personal futures (e.g.
time, as subjects did in the earlier studies. Although reading the newspaper each morning). We reasoned that
Botzung et al. excluded those trials in which subjects in a region that is responsive to the amount of detail
stated that they produced an event from the pre-scan recombined into a coherent imagined episode, as we
interview, it is unclear how reliably subjects can make suggested with respect to the hippocampus (Addis &
the requested discrimination. Moreover, since subjects Schacter 2008), more activity should be evident when
had previously encoded their future event simulation, constructing specific future events relative to general
rather than constructing it anew during scanning as in future events (as well as specific and generic past events).
previous studies, there may have been less recruitment By contrast, if the hippocampal region is simply
of processes involved in recombining details from past responsive to the prospective nature of future events,
experiences. Similar findings have been reported in then it should be more engaged during the construction
other studies examining the retrieval of previously of both types of future events relative to past events,
constructed imaginary events (Hassabis et al. 2007a; irrespective of specificity.
D’Argembeau et al. 2008). We replicated the aforementioned findings of
Two more recent studies from our laboratory have equivalent left hippocampal activity during the con-
further examined the nature of hippocampal acti- struction of past and future events, and greater right
vations observed during the construction and elabor- hippocampal activity for future than past event
ation stages of event remembering and simulation, construction. Importantly, though, the increased right
respectively. Addis & Schacter (2008) further analysed hippocampal activity was evident only for specific
the elaboration-stage data reported initially by Addis events; in fact, there was no evidence for right
et al. (2007), using parametric modulation analyses to hippocampal activity during construction of generic
examine MTL activity according to the amount of future events. Thus, the results appear to provide
detail generated and the temporal distance of each evidence against the idea that right hippocampal
event from the present. We suggested that reintegrating activation for specific future events indicates a uniquely
increasing amounts of detail for either a past or future prospective function for this region. Importantly, there
event would be associated with increasing levels of were regions that did show activation patterns that
hippocampal activity. However, future events should could be interpreted as reflecting as a prospective
require more intensive recombining of disparate details function, such as the left frontopolar cortex, in
into a coherent event, so the hippocampal response to which construction of future events resulted in greater
increasing amounts of future event detail should be activity than past events, irrespective of the specificity
larger than that for past event detail. Consistent with of the event.
these predictions, the analysis showed that the left An event-related fMRI study by Hassabis et al.
posterior hippocampus was responsive to the amount (2007a) also provides data that call into question the
of detail for both the past and future events, probably idea that MTL activation during event simulation is
reflecting the retrieval of details from episodic memory tied specifically to thinking about events in one’s future.
that is required for both tasks. By contrast, a distinct Participants were asked to imagine novel, fictitious
region in the left anterior hippocampus responded scenes, without explicit reference to whether those
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B (2009)

5. Downloaded from rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org on 6 October 2009
1248 D. L. Schacter & D. R. Addis Constructive simulation of future events
scenes should be placed in the past, present or future. finding that the hippocampus was robustly activated
Subjects were then scanned in a subsequent session in during event simulation when we experimentally
which they were cued to remember the previously recombined details concerning person, object and place
constructed fictitious scenes, construct additional from different episodes provides evidence against this
novel fictitious scenes or recall real episodic memories recasting hypothesis. Although we would not rule out the
from their personal pasts. Hassabis et al. found that possibility that recasting occurs on some test trials,
all three conditions were associated with activations the finding of hippocampal activation in this paradigm,
in the hippocampus, parahippocampal gyrus and which should minimize or eliminate recasting, is
several other regions in the core network. The results consistent with the claim from the constructive episodic
thus indicate that activity in these regions is not simulation hypothesis, that activity in the hippocampus
restricted to conditions that explicitly require imagin- during event simulation reflects the recombination of
ing future events. details from different episodes.
Additional evidence on this point is provided by One feature common to the neuroimaging studies
another recent study from our laboratory. Addis et al. reviewed so far is that each one provided some evidence
(in press) approached the question of whether future for activity in both the hippocampal and parahippo-
event-related activity is specifically associated with campal regions in conditions designed to elicit future
prospective thinking, or with the more general event simulation (Okuda et al. 2003; Addis et al. 2007,
demands of imagining an episodic event in either in press; Botzung et al. 2008) or imagination (Hassabis
temporal direction, by instructing subjects to imagine et al. 2007a). Szpunar et al. (2007) reported a
events that might occur in their personal future or contrasting pattern of results. In their fMRI study,
events that might have occurred in their personal participants were given event cues, such as past birthday
pasts but did not. Prior to scanning, participants or retirement party, and were instructed to remember
provided episodic memories of actual experiences specific events from their personal pasts, imagine
that included details about a person, object and place specific events that might reasonably occur in their
involved in that event. During scanning, the subjects personal futures or imagine specific events that could
were cued to recall some of the events that had involve a familiar individual (Bill Clinton). Compared
actually occurred, and for the conditions in which with the latter condition, remembering one’s personal
they imagined events, the experimenters randomly
past or simulating one’s personal future was associated
recombined details concerning person, object and
with significant and comparable levels of activity in the
place from separate episodes. Participants were thus
bilateral parahippocampal cortex, as well as other
presented with cues for a person, object and place
regions activated in other studies, including other
taken from multiple episodes, and were instructed to
posterior regions such as posterior cingulate and
imagine a single, novel episode that included the
anterior regions such as the frontopolar cortex. By
specified details.
contrast, no evidence for hippocampal activation was
With respect to the MTL, Addis et al. (in press)
reported in the personal past or future conditions
reported that both the hippocampus and parahippo-
relative to the ‘Bill Clinton’ control. We will return to
campal cortex were similarly engaged when partici-
pants imagined future and past events, suggesting this observation later when considering theoretical
that these regions (as well as others in the core network implications of the aforementioned results.
that showed the same pattern) can be used for Szpunar et al. (in press) sought to characterize the
event simulation regardless of the temporal location nature of activity they had observed in the para-
of the event. hippocampal and related posterior regions. They
This study also allowed us to address an issue that is noted previous work from Bar & Aminoff (2003),
particularly relevant to the constructive episodic suggesting that the parahippocampal cortex and
simulation hypothesis discussed earlier, which empha- posterior cingulate are involved in processing con-
sizes that future event simulations are built by flexibly textual associations, thus suggesting that these
recombining details from past experiences, probably regions may be responsible for generating the familiar
engaging the relational processes supported by the contexts in which future event simulations are
hippocampus. However, our previous studies on situated (Addis et al. 2007; Szpunar et al. 2007). To
imagining future events did not provide direct evidence test the idea, Szpunar et al. asked participants to
that subjects recombine details from multiple past imagine themselves in future scenarios involving
events into novel future simulations. An alternative either a familiar or an unfamiliar context; they also
possibility is that participants simply recast their asked participants to remember past experiences
memories of individual past experiences as imagined involving familiar contexts. They carried out region-
future events, especially when they are thinking about of-interest analyses focused on the areas within the
events that might plausibly occur in the near future. For bilateral parahippocampal cortex and posterior
example, when given the cue ‘car’ and asked to imagine cingulate that had been activated in their previous
an event that might occur in the next few weeks study. Consistent with the hypothesis that these
involving a car, participants might simply recall a recent regions are important for instantiating contextual
episode in which they saw a car cross a red light, and information, both regions showed robust activity in
imagine that such an incident might occur in the next the past and future conditions that required gener-
few weeks. When this kind of recasting process occurs, ating a familiar context, and significantly less activity
there is little or no recombination of details of past in the future condition that required generating an
events into imagined future scenarios. However, the unfamiliar context.
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B (2009)

6. Downloaded from rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org on 6 October 2009
Constructive simulation of future events D. L. Schacter & D. R. Addis 1249
4. STUDIES OF AMNESIC PATIENTS AND known to be dependent on the hippocampus. Second,
OLDER ADULTS hippocampal atrophy has been documented in older
Although most of the evidence linking future event adults (e.g. Driscoll et al. 2003).
simulation with MTL activity comes from neuroima-
ging studies, additional evidence is provided by studies
of amnesic patients, who exhibit an impairment in the 5. MTL AND FUTURE EVENT SIMULATION:
ability to remember past experiences as a result of SUMMARY, EXTENSIONS AND THEORETICAL
bilateral damage to the MTLs and related structures. IMPLICATIONS
Tulving (1985) reported that the severely amnesic The studies reviewed in the preceding sections are
patient K. C., who cannot remember any specific broadly consistent with the idea that regions within the
episodes from his past (for a review of K. C., see MTL are associated with constructing simulations of
Rosenbaum et al. 2005), exhibits similar problems future events. We discuss now a number of points
envisioning any specific episodes in his future. K. C. is regarding these studies and related research that has
characterized by bilateral MTL damage, but also has characterized MTL function in different domains.
extensive prefrontal damage, and in other regions (see First, consider the neuroimaging studies that we
Rosenbaum et al. 2005), so it is unclear whether his reviewed. On balance, the most consistent feature of
problems imagining the future are associated speci- the neuroimaging data is that both the hippocampus
fically with the MTL. A similar caveat applies to a more and parahippocampal cortices are similarly active
recent study concerning patient D. B., who became during the simulation of future events and the
amnesic as a result of cardiac arrest and consequent remembering of past events, in agreement with a
anoxia (Klein et al. 2002). D. B. showed clear deficits meta-analysis by Spreng et al. (in press). In addition,
on a 10-item questionnaire probing past and future however, it is clear that this common activation of the
personal events that were matched for temporal hippocampus and parahippocampus is not restricted to
distance from the present. However, even though conditions requiring prospective event simulation: the
anoxia is typically associated with MTL damage, no same regions are engaged when individuals are
neuroanatomical findings were reported concerning instructed to simulate events that might have occurred
patient D. B. in their pasts (Addis et al. in press) or when asked to
Hassabis et al. (2007b) examined the ability of five imagine scenes without a specific temporal reference
patients with documented bilateral hippocampal amne- (Hassabis et al. 2007a). This latter finding fits well with
sia to imagine novel experiences, such as ‘imagine the related observations that both regions show
you’re lying on a white sandy beach in a beautiful similarly increased activity during tasks involving
tropical bay’. The experimenters scored the construc- spatial navigation (for a review, see Buckner & Carroll
tions of patients and controls based on the content, 2007; Spreng et al. in press) and, under some
spatial coherence and subjective qualities of the conditions, during tasks requiring theory of mind
imagined scenarios. Four of the five hippocampal judgements, which commonly activate medial pre-
patients produced constructions that were significantly frontal and parietal regions of the core network
reduced in richness and content, and especially, the (Buckner & Carroll 2007; Spreng et al. in press; but
spatial coherence of the scenarios, relative to scenarios these structures are probably not necessary for some
constructed by controls. The single patient who theory of mind tasks on which amnesic patients
performed normally on the imaginary scene task perform well; see Rosenbaum et al. 2007).
maintained some residual hippocampal tissue. Since Even though more evidence is required given the
the lesions in the other cases appear to be restricted to relatively small database, in general, extant results
hippocampal formation, this study strengthens the link support the view that the hippocampal and parahippo-
between event simulation and hippocampal function. campal regions are engaged when individuals build
We also note that a recent study by Addis et al. simulations of events located in the future, past or
(2008b) provides evidence that future event simulation present. Thus, although our focus in the present paper
is impaired in older adults, who also exhibit memory remains on the simulation of future events, it seems
impairments, albeit considerably milder than those likely that ideas concerning the role of MTL regions
seen in amnesic patients. Young and older participants apply more broadly to other kinds of simulations.
generated memories of past events and simulations of Another issue raised by neuroimaging studies
future events in response to individual word cues, and concerns the evidence that the hippocampal and
transcriptions of the events were segmented into parahippocampal regions can be differentially engaged
distinct details that were classified as either internal by tasks requiring future event simulation compared
(episodic) or external (semantic; cf. Levine et al. 2002). with autobiographical remembering. Addis et al.
The key finding was that older adults generated fewer (2007) reported that the right hippocampus shows
internal (but not external) details than younger adults; greater activity during construction of future than past
importantly, this effect was observed to the same extent events, a finding that we subsequently replicated when
for future events as for past events. Although there is no demonstrating that the effect occurs for specific but not
direct evidence from this study linking the age-related general future events. By contrast, Okuda et al. (2003)
deficits to MTL dysfunction, two kinds of indirect reported greater future than past activity for two areas
evidence suggest that such a link may exist. First, we within the left parahippocampal gyrus. The contrasting
reported that the internal (but not external) detail score results suggest that interpretive caution must be
in older adults correlated significantly with a measure exercised regarding a possible difference between the
of relational memory (paired-associate learning) that is hippocampal and parahippocampal regions in this
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B (2009)

7. Downloaded from rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org on 6 October 2009
1250 D. L. Schacter & D. R. Addis Constructive simulation of future events
respect, but given that the right hippocampal effect has By contrast, a region of the left posterior hippocampus
been replicated, and the methodological concerns ( yZ30) was engaged by all tasks requiring the retrieval
noted earlier regarding the Okuda et al. (2003) of relational information (i.e. correct recognition of
study, we are inclined to assign more weight at the A–B, B–C and A–C pairs). Linking these observations
present time to the hippocampal than the parahippo- with the aforementioned data from Addis & Schacter
campal finding. (2008), perhaps both the past and future events require
We have suggested that the future greater than past the retrieval of some form of relational information (i.e.
activity in the right hippocampus could reflect the more details that were encoded as part of a complex
intensive constructive activity associated with recom- autobiographical memory) and commonly engage the
bining details of past events to generate a novel future posterior hippocampus, whereas only future events
event (Addis et al. 2007). Note that this effect require recombining such details, and thus, as in
was observed in the right anterior hippocampus Preston et al.’s study, recruit the anterior hippocampus.
(Talairach xyz coordinateZ40, K22, K11 for the The foregoing observations might be useful in
peak voxel in Addis et al. (2007)). This idea fits thinking about one of the puzzling findings from
nicely with our thinking about the finding reported by neuroimaging research noted earlier: in contrast to
Addis & Schacter (2008) during event elaboration, other studies, Szpunar et al. (2007) did not report
where activity in a left anterior hippocampal region evidence of hippocampal activation when individuals
(xyzZK20, K22, K6) correlated with the amount of simulated events in their personal futures, compared
detail in future but not past events, while left posterior with when they imagined Bill Clinton participating in
hippocampal activity (xyzZK18, K34, 1) correlated similar kinds of events. We suggested that both of these
with both the future and past details. This latter region tasks probably involve the kind of relational processing
is quite close to the posterior hippocampal region and recombining of event details thought to elicit
associated with the amount of retrieved detail in an hippocampal activation. If so, significant hippocampal
earlier study of autobiographical memory (xyzZK20, activation during each task would not be evident in a
K37, 0; Addis et al. 2004). These observations led us to comparison between tasks.
propose that the anterior hippocampal region is Of course, the question of whether hippocampal
specifically involved in recombining details from past regions are necessary for simulating future events
events, converging with our account of the future
cannot be answered by neuroimaging studies alone,
greater than past activity during construction in the
which are necessarily correlational in nature. More-
right anterior hippocampus.
over, the imaging evidence leaves open the question of
These ideas also fit with findings from other memory
whether hippocampal activity during future event
paradigms. In a meta-analysis of MTL activations
simulation reflects retrieval and /or recombination of
during encoding and retrieval, Schacter & Wagner
event details, as we have suggested, versus the
(1999) noted evidence linking anterior hippocampal
encoding and storage of novel information. As we
activity with relational or associative processing at both
have stressed, future event simulations involve the
encoding and retrieval. Subsequent research has been
construction of novel scenarios, and the hippocampus
largely consistent with this observation, as anterior
regions of the hippocampus showed preferential appears to play a role in the encoding of novel
activation in conditions requiring relational processing events (e.g. Ranganath & Rainer 2003). Evidence
at both encoding (e.g. Giovanello et al. 2004; Jackson & reviewed earlier indicating impaired future event
Schacter 2004; Kirwan & Stark 2004; Chua et al. 2007) simulation in amnesic patients is consistent with the
and retrieval (Giovanello et al. 2004; Kirwan & Stark idea that the hippocampal region is indeed necessary
2004). Recent work using functional connectivity for retrieving and /or recombining event details into a
analyses of rest fMRI data has suggested that the representation that supports simulation of the future,
anterior and posterior hippocampus are connected but further studies of amnesic patients are required to
with distinct cortical systems (Kahn et al. 2008). understand more fully the nature and extent of their
Findings reported by Preston et al. (2004; see also simulation deficits.
Heckers et al. 2004) point towards an even further Intriguingly, several recent studies of rodents have
possible refinement of the foregoing ideas, suggesting shown that hippocampal neurons code for prospective
that left anterior hippocampal activity ( yZK22) is information concerning where the rat needs to go in the
associated specifically with recombining elements from immediate future (e.g. Ferbinteanu & Shapiro 2003;
previously learned associations. They used a transitive Foster & Wilson 2007; Johnson & Redish 2007). For
inference design in which participants first learned to instance, Johnson & Redish (2007) recorded from
associate specific faces (stimuli A) with specific houses ensembles of neurons with place fields in the CA3
(stimuli B), and then learned to associate another set of region of the hippocampus, allowing them to analyse
faces (stimuli C) with the same houses (stimuli B). activity during choices made by rats in a spatial decision
Critically, the A and C faces were not shown together task. On some trials, the spatial representation
during training, but were related to one another reconstructed from the neural ensemble appeared to
through their overlapping associations with the same indicate possible future paths, leading Johnson and
house (B). During scanning, correctly recognizing that Redish to suggest that the hippocampus may be a
the A–C face pair contained related elements signi- source of prospective memory signals. It will be
ficantly engaged the left anterior hippocampus relative important to investigate whether and to what extent
to all other recognition conditions, including successful such findings are related to the observations on future
recognition of A–B and B–C face–house pairs as ‘old’. event simulation in humans considered here.
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B (2009)

8. Downloaded from rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org on 6 October 2009
Constructive simulation of future events D. L. Schacter & D. R. Addis 1251
Let us also consider the role of the parahippocampal events, so it would make sense from the perspective of
region in future event simulation. As we have seen, this the reality monitoring framework that regions associ-
region is activated consistently in neuroimaging studies ated with processing of sensory and contextual details
as part of a more general core network. Although would show greater activity for real than imagined
hippocampal and parahippocampal regions generally events.
show similar activity patterns, there are reasons to posit Although much work remains to be done, we believe
that they play different roles within the network. that the research considered here has the potential to
Evidence discussed earlier from Szpunar et al. enrich, broaden and, perhaps, alter our ideas about the
(in press) suggests that the parahippocampal region nature and functions of memory, as well as our thinking
(along with posterior cingulate) is important for about how the MTL allows us to stay connected with
generating familiar contexts that contribute to future both the past and the future.
event simulations. This idea fits well with the previously
mentioned studies of Bar & Aminoff (2003; see also, The preparation of this paper was supported by grants from
Bar 2007), which have independently implicated the the NIMH and NIA. We thank Adrian Gilmore for his help
with the preparation of the manuscript.
parahippocampal cortex (and posterior cingulate/
retrosplenial cortex) in contextual processing. Strong
evidence that the parahippocampal region contributes
specifically to the generation of contextual associations REFERENCES
comes from a recent study by Bar et al. (2008), who Addis, D. R. & Schacter, D. L. 2008 Constructive episodic
showed that it responds more strongly to scenes with simulation: temporal distance and detail of past and future
strong contextual associations (e.g. scenes involving events modulate hippocampal engagement. Hippocampus
objects such as a traffic light, which are strongly 18, 227–237. (doi:10.1002/hipo.20405)
associated with a particular context) when compared Addis, D. R., Moscovitch, M., Crawley, A. P. & McAndrews,
with scenes that are matched with respect to visual M. P. 2004 Recollective qualities modulate hippocampal
activation during autobiographical memory retrieval.
qualities but have weaker contextual associations (e.g.
Hippocampus 14, 752–762. (doi:10.1002/hipo.10215)
scenes involving objects such as a water bottle, which
Addis, D. R., Wong, A. T. & Schacter, D. L. 2007
are not strongly associated with a particular context). It Remembering the past and imagining the future: common
therefore makes both theoretical and empirical sense to and distinct neural substrates during event construction
suggest that the parahippocampal region may allow and elaboration. Neuropsychologia 45, 1363 –1377. (doi:10.
access to contextual associations that are recombined 1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.10.016)
by the hippocampus with other kinds of event details to Addis, D. R., Cheng, T. & Schacter, D. L. 2008a Episodic
create a full-blown episodic simulation. simulation of specific and general future events. Paper
Finally, we note that the research considered here presented at the Annual Meeting of the Organization for
also raises important issues regarding reality monitoring Human Brain Mapping.
processes that allow us to distinguish between Addis, D. R., Wong, A. T. & Schacter, D. L. 2008b Age-
remembered and imagined events ( Johnson & Raye related changes in the episodic simulation of future events.
1981). If, as we have seen, remembering past events Psychol. Sci. 19, 33 – 41. (doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.
and imagining future or novel events recruit largely 02043.x)
overlapping brain networks, including the MTL, then Addis, D. R., Pan, L., Vu, M.-A., Laiser, N. & Schacter, D. L.
In press. Constructive episodic simulation of the future
how do individuals distinguish mental simulations from
and the past: distinct subsystems of a core brain network
memories of real events? There is probably no simple
mediate imagining and remembering. Neuropsychologia.
answer to this question (for a recent discussion see (doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.10.026)
Hassabis et al. (2007a)), but we think there is a role for Bar, M. 2007 The proactive brain: using analogies and
the well-known idea from research on reality moni- associations to generate predictions. Trends Cogn. Sci. 11,
toring that remembering events that one has actually 280–289. (doi:10.1016/j.tics.2007.05.005)
experienced is associated with greater sensory and Bar, M. & Aminoff, E. 2003 Cortical analysis of visual
perceptual details than remembering previously ima- context. Neuron 38, 347– 358. (doi:10.1016/S0896-6273
gined events (e.g. Johnson & Raye 1981). This idea has (03)00167-3)
received support from behavioural studies (e.g. Bar, M., Aminoff, E. & Schacter, D. L. 2008 Scenes unseen:
Johnson et al. 1988) as well as neuroimaging research the parahippocampal cortex intrinsically subserves con-
(Kensinger & Schacter 2006; see also, Slotnick & textual associations, not scenes or places per se.
Schacter 2004). J. Neurosci. 28, 8539 –8544. (doi:10.1523/JNEUROS
More directly related to the present concerns, in our CI.0987-08.2008)
previously discussed study using experimental recom- Botzung, A., Denkova, E. & Manning, L. 2008 Experien-
cing past and future personal events: functional neuroi-
bination of event details (Addis et al. in press), we
maging evidence on the neural bases of mental time
found evidence suggesting the existence of distinct
travel. Brain Cogn. 66, 202–212. (doi:10.1016/j.bandc.
remembering and imagining subsystems within the 2007.07.011)
core network. Remembering actual autobiographical Buckner, R. L. & Carroll, D. C. 2007 Self-projection and the
events was preferentially associated with activity in the brain. Trends Cogn. Sci. 11, 49 –57. (doi:10.1016/j.tics.
parahippocampal cortex and posterior visual regions, 2006.11.004)
whereas imagining future or past events was preferen- Buckner, R. L., Andrews, J. R. & Schacter, D. L. 2008 The
tially associated with a subsystem including the anterior brain’s default network: anatomy, function, and relevance
hippocampus. In our study, remembered events were to disease. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 1124, 1– 38. (doi:10.1196/
rated as significantly more detailed than imagined annals.1440.011)
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B (2009)

9. Downloaded from rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org on 6 October 2009
1252 D. L. Schacter & D. R. Addis Constructive simulation of future events
Cabeza, R. & St Jacques, P. 2007 Functional neuroimaging of perceived and imagined autobiographical events. J. Exp.
autobiographical memory. Trends Cogn. Sci. 11, 219 –227. Psychol. Gen. 117, 371– 376. (doi:10.1037/0096-3445.
(doi:10.1016/j.tics.2007.02.005) 117.4.371)
Chua, E. F., Schacter, D. L., Rand-Giovanelli, E. & Kahn, I., Andrews-Hanna, J. R., Vincent, J. L., Snyder, A. Z. &
Sperling, R. A. 2007 Evidence for a specific role of the Buckner, R. L. 2008 Distinct cortical anatomy linked to
anterior hippocampal region in successful associative subregions of the medial temporal lobe revealed by intrinsic
encoding. Hippocampus 17, 1071–1080. (doi:10.1002/ functional connectivity. J. Neurophysiol. 100, 129 –139.
hipo.20340) (doi:10.1152/jn.00077.2008)
D’Argembeau, A. & Van der Linden, M. 2004 Phenomenal Kensinger, E. A. & Schacter, D. L. 2006 Neural processes
characteristics associated with projecting oneself back into underlying memory attribution on a reality-monitoring
the past and forward into the future: influence of valence task. Cereb. Cortex 16, 1126 –1133. (doi:10.1093/cercor/
and temporal distance. Conscious. Cogn. 13, 844–858. bhj054)
(doi:10.1016/j.concog.2004.07.007) Kirwan, C. B. & Stark, C. E. 2004 Medial temporal lobe
D’Argembeau, A., Xue, G., Lu, Z. L., Van der Linden, M. & activation during encoding and retrieval of novel face-
Bechara, A. 2008 Neural correlates of envisioning name pairs. Hippocampus 14, 919 – 930. (doi:10.1002/
emotional events in the near and far future. Neuroimage hipo.20014)
40, 398 – 407. (doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.11.025) Klein, S. B., Loftus, J. & Kihlstrom, J. F. 2002 Memory and
Driscoll, I., Hamilton, D. A., Petropoulos, H., Yeo, R. A., temporal experience: the effects of episodic memory loss in
Brooks, W. M., Baumgarter, R. N. & Sutherland, R. J. an amnesic patient’s ability to remember the past and
2003 The aging hippocampus: cognitive, biochemical, and imagine the future. Soc. Cogn. 20, 353 – 379. (doi:10.1521/
structural findings. Cereb. Cortex 13, 1344–1351. (doi:10. soco.20.5.353.21125)
1093/cercor/bhg081) Levine, B., Svoboda, E., Hay, J. F., Winocur, G. &
Dudai, Y. & Carruthers, M. 2005 The Janus face of Moscovitch, M. 2002 Aging and autobiographical mem-
mnemosyne. Nature 434, 823–824. (doi:10.1038/434823a) ory: dissociating episodic from semantic retrieval. Psychol.
Eichenbaum, H. & Cohen, N. J. 2001 From conditioning to Aging 17, 677–689. (doi:10.1037/0882-7974.17.4.677)
conscious recollection: memory systems of the brain. New York, Okuda, J. et al. 2003 Thinking of the future and the past:
NY: Oxford University Press. the roles of the frontal pole and the medial temporal
Ferbinteanu, J. & Shapiro, M. L. 2003 Prospective and lobes. Neuroimage 19, 1369 –1380. (doi:10.1016/S1053-
retrospective memory coding in the hippocampus. Neuron 8119(03)00179-4)
40, 1227–1239. (doi:10.1016/S0896-6273(03)00752-9) Preston, A. R., Shrager, Y., Dudukovic, N. M. &
Foster, D. J. & Wilson, M. A. 2007 Hippocampal theta
Gabrieli, J. D. 2004 Hippocampal contribution to the
sequences. Hippocampus 17, 1093 –1099. (doi:10.1002/
novel use of relational information in declarative
hipo.20345)
memory. Hippocampus 14, 148 –152. (doi:10.1002/
Gilbert, D. T. 2006 Stumbling on happiness. New York, NY:
hipo.20009)
Alfred A. Knopf.
Ranganath, C. & Rainer, G. 2003 Neural mechanisms for
Gilbert, D. T. & Wilson, T. 2007 Prospection: experiencing
detecting and remembering novel events. Nat. Rev.
the future. Science 317, 1351–1354. (doi:10.1126/science.
Neurosci. 4, 193 –202. (doi:10.1038/nrn1052)
1144161)
Rosenbaum, R. S., Kohler, S., Schacter, D. L.,
Giovanello, K. S., Schnyer, D. M. & Verfaellie, M. 2004
Moscovitch, M., Westmacott, R., Black, S. E., Gao, F.
A critical role for the anterior hippocampus in relational
memory: evidence from an fMRI study comparing & Tulving, E. 2005 The case of K.C.: contributions of a
associative and item recognition. Hippocampus 14, 5 –8. memory-impaired person to memory theory. Neuropsy-
(doi:10.1002/hipo.10182) chologia 43, 989 –1021. (doi:10.1016/j.neuropsycholo-
Hassabis, D. & Maguire, E. A. 2007 Deconstructing episodic gia.2004.10.007)
memory with construction. Trends Cogn. Sci. 11, 299 – 306. Rosenbaum, R. S., Stuss, D. T., Levine, B. & Tulving, E.
(doi:10.1016/j.tics.2007.05.001) 2007 Theory of mind is independent of episodic
Hassabis, D., Kumaran, D. & Maguire, E. A. 2007a Using memory. Science 318, 1257. (doi:10.1126/science.
imagination to understand the neural basis of episodic 1148763)
memory. J. Neurosci. 27, 14 365 –14 374. (doi:10.1523/ Schacter, D. L. & Addis, D. R. 2007a The cognitive
JNEUROSCI.4549-07.2007) neuroscience of constructive memory: remembering the
Hassabis, D., Kumaran, D., Vann, S. D. & Maguire, E. A. past and imagining the future. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 362,
2007b Patients with hippocampal amnesia can not 773 –786. (doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2087)
imagine new experiences. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, Schacter, D. L. & Addis, D. R. 2007b The ghosts of past and
1726 –1731. (doi:10.1073/pnas.0610561104) future. Nature 445, 27. (doi:10.1038/445027a)
Heckers, S., Zalesak, M., Weiss, A. P., Ditman, T. & Titone, Schacter, D. L. & Wagner, A. D. 1999 Medial temporal
D. 2004 Hippocampal activation during transitive infer- lobe activations in fMRI and PET studies of episodic
ence in humans. Hippocampus 14, 153 –162. (doi:10.1002/ encoding and retrieval. Hippocampus 9, 7–24. (doi:10.
hipo.10189) 1002/(SICI)1098-1063(1999)9:1!7::AID-HIPO2O3.0.
Jackson, O. & Schacter, D. L. 2004 Encoding activity in CO;2-K)
anterior medial temporal lobe supports associative recog- Schacter, D. L., Addis, D. R. & Buckner, R. L. 2007
nition. Neuroimage 21, 456 – 464. (doi:10.1016/j.neuro- Remembering the past to imagine the future: the
image.2003.09.050) prospective brain. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 8, 657–661.
Johnson, M. K. & Raye, C. L. 1981 Reality monitoring. Psychol. (doi:10.1038/nrn2213)
Rev. 88, 67–85. (doi:10.1037/0033-295X.88.1.67) Schacter, D. L., Addis, D. R. & Buckner, R. L. 2008 Episodic
Johnson, A. & Redish, A. D. 2007 Neural ensembles in CA3 simulation of future events: concepts, data, and appli-
transiently encode paths forward of the animal at a cations. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 1124, 39 –60. (doi:10.1196/
decision point. J. Neurosci. 27, 12 176 –12 189. (doi:10. annals.1440.001)
1523/JNEUROSCI.3761-07.2007) Slotnick, S. D. & Schacter, D. L. 2004 A sensory signature
Johnson, M. K., Foley, M. A., Suengas, A. G. & Raye, C. L. that distinguishes true from false memories. Nat. Neurosci.
1988 Phenomenal characteristics of memories for 7, 664–672. (doi:10.1038/nn1252)
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B (2009)

10. Downloaded from rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org on 6 October 2009
Constructive simulation of future events D. L. Schacter & D. R. Addis 1253
Spreng, R. N., Mar, R. A. & Kim, A. S. N. In press. The Svoboda, E., McKinnon, M. C. & Levine, B. 2006 The
common neural basis of autobiographical memory, functional neuroanatomy of autobiographical memory:
prospection, navigation, theory of mind, and the default a meta-analysis. Neuropsychologia 44, 2189 –2208. (doi:10.
mode: a quantitative meta-analysis. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.05.023)
(doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.21029) Szpunar, K. K., Watson, J. M. & McDermott, K. B. 2007
Suddendorf, T. & Corballis, M. C. 1997 Mental time travel Neural substrates of envisioning the future. Proc. Natl Acad.
and the evolution of the human mind. Genet. Soc. Gen. Sci. USA 104, 642–647. (doi:10.1073/pnas.0610082104)
Psychol. Monogr. 123, 133 –167. Szpunar, K. K., Chan, C. K. & McDermott, K. B. In press.
Suddendorf, T. & Corballis, M. C. 2007 The evolution of Contextual processing in episodic future thought. Cereb.
foresight: what is mental time travel and is it unique to Cortex (doi:10.1093/cercor/bhn191)
humans? Behav. Brain Sci. 30, 299 – 313. (doi:10.1017/ Tulving, E. 1985 Memory and consciousness. Can. Psychol.
S0140525X07001975) 26, 1–12. (doi:10.1037/h0080017)
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B (2009)