Neuropsychologia · 2015
Representation of visual symbols in the visual word processing network.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Muayqil Taim, Davies-Thompson Jodie, Barton Jason J S
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that word processing involves a predominantly left-sided occipitotemporal network. Words are a form of symbolic representation, in that they are arbitrary perceptual stimuli that represent other objects, actions or concepts. Lesions of parts of the visual word processing network can cause alexia, which can be associated with difficulty processing other types of symbols such as musical notation or road signs.
OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether components of the visual word processing network were also activated by other types of symbols.
METHOD: In 16 music-literate subjects, we defined the visual word network using fMRI and examined responses to four symbolic categories: visual words, musical notation, instructive symbols (e.g. traffic signs), and flags and logos. For each category we compared responses not only to scrambled stimuli, but also to similar stimuli that lacked symbolic meaning.
RESULTS: The left visual word form area and a homologous right fusiform region responded similarly to all four categories, but equally to both symbolic and non-symbolic equivalents. Greater response to symbolic than non-symbolic stimuli occurred only in the left inferior frontal and middle temporal gyri, but only for words, and in the case of the left inferior frontal gyri, also for musical notation. A whole-brain analysis comparing symbolic versus non-symbolic stimuli revealed a distributed network of inferior temporooccipital and parietal regions that differed for different symbols.
CONCLUSION: The fusiform gyri are involved in processing the form of many symbolic stimuli, but not specifically for stimuli with symbolic content. Selectivity for stimuli with symbolic content only emerges in the visual word network at the level of the middle temporal and inferior frontal gyri, but is specific for words and musical notation.
OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether components of the visual word processing network were also activated by other types of symbols.
METHOD: In 16 music-literate subjects, we defined the visual word network using fMRI and examined responses to four symbolic categories: visual words, musical notation, instructive symbols (e.g. traffic signs), and flags and logos. For each category we compared responses not only to scrambled stimuli, but also to similar stimuli that lacked symbolic meaning.
RESULTS: The left visual word form area and a homologous right fusiform region responded similarly to all four categories, but equally to both symbolic and non-symbolic equivalents. Greater response to symbolic than non-symbolic stimuli occurred only in the left inferior frontal and middle temporal gyri, but only for words, and in the case of the left inferior frontal gyri, also for musical notation. A whole-brain analysis comparing symbolic versus non-symbolic stimuli revealed a distributed network of inferior temporooccipital and parietal regions that differed for different symbols.
CONCLUSION: The fusiform gyri are involved in processing the form of many symbolic stimuli, but not specifically for stimuli with symbolic content. Selectivity for stimuli with symbolic content only emerges in the visual word network at the level of the middle temporal and inferior frontal gyri, but is specific for words and musical notation.