Correction to: Scientific Reports https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-53823-w, published online 05 December 2019
This Article contains errors. In Figures 4A and 5A “ns” is incorrectly written as “nc”. The correct Figures 4 and 5 appear below as Figures 1 and 2.
Enhancement of space-time binding in the EM Test. (A) The graphs present the accuracy means for object-time, object-space, and space-time binding components of the EM Test in the TD sample divided by age-groups (2–4; 4–6; 6–8 yrs). (B) Presents the accuracy means of Space-Time Test compared to space-time binding scores of the EM Test (left), and Object-Time Test compared to object-time binding of the EM Test for 2–4-years old children (right). (C) Presents the distribution of each EM binding components across all TD subjects. ns; p < 0.05 *p < 0.01 **.
Deficit in space-time binding and full EM in Williams Syndrome. (A) The graphs represent the accuracy means for Space-Time, Object-Time and EM tests in WS patients, compared to MA and CA controls. (B) The graphs present the mean accuracies for spatial location and space-time binding adjusted for spatial location performance (above), and for object identity and object-time binding adjusted for object identity accuracy (below). Adjusted means were calculated using GZLM. ns = not significant. p < 0.05 *, p < 0.01 **.
In addition, the legend for Table 1 is incorrect.
“Correlations between EM Test components. Pearson’s zero-order correlation for object-time, object-space, and space-time binding components and the total score of the EM Test in the TD sample.”
should read:
“Correlations between EM Test components. A. Pearson’s correlation for object-time, object-space, and space-time binding components and the total score of the EM Test in the TD sample. B. Partial two-tails correlations between object-time and object-space binding components controlled for the effect of object-space, object-time and space-time binding. ns; p < 0.05 *; p < 0.01 **”
Finally, in Table 2, the value “.566**” is incorrectly given as “566**”, and the value “.093 (ns)” is incorrectly given as “,0.93 (ns)” and “0.093 (ns)”, and the value “.330**” is incorrectly given as “0.330**”.
The correct Table 2 appears below as Table 1.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Mastrogiuseppe, M., Bertelsen, N., Bedeschi, M.F. et al. Author Correction: The spatiotemporal organization of episodic memory and its disruption in a neurodevelopmental disorder. Sci Rep 10, 18814 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-75727-w
Published:
Version of record:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-75727-w
