What drives the organization of object knowledge in the brain?

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 97-103

  Mahon, Bradford Z ^a,b   Caramazza, Alfonso ^c,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TRENTO   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BRAIN REGIONS; CONCEPTUAL KNOWLEDGE; DOMAIN SPECIFIC; NEW DIRECTIONS; PROCESS INFORMATION; SEMANTIC DOMAINS;

SEMANTICS;

BRAIN;

BRAIN CORTEX; BRAIN FUNCTION; BRAIN REGION; COGNITION; HUMAN; NEUROIMAGING; NONHUMAN; PRIMATE; PROSOPAGNOSIA; PSYCHOSOCIAL DEVELOPMENT; SEMANTICS; SHORT SURVEY; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ANIMALS; BRAIN; BRAIN MAPPING; COGNITION; COGNITION DISORDERS; HUMANS; KNOWLEDGE; NEURAL PATHWAYS; SEMANTICS; TWIN STUDIES AS TOPIC;

EID: 79951944788     PISSN: 13646613     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2011.01.004     Document Type: Short Survey

References (70)

1. Capitani E., et al. What are the facts of category-specific deficits? A critical review of the clinical evidence. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 2003, 20:213-261.
2. Caramazza A., Shelton J.R. Domain specific knowledge systems in the brain: the animate-inanimate distinction. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 1998, 10:1-34.
3. Caramazza A., Mahon B.Z. The organization of conceptual knowledge: the evidence from category-specific semantic deficits. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2003, 7:354-361.
4. Martin A. The representation of object concepts in the brain. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2007, 58:25-45.
5. Miceli G., et al. The dissociation of color from form and function knowledge. Nat. Neurosci. 2001, 4:662-667.
6. Grill-Spector K., Malach R. The human visual cortex. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 2004, 27:649-677.
7. Cant J.S., et al. fMR-adaptation reveals separate processing regions for the perception of form and texture in the human ventral stream. Exp. Brain Res. 2009, 192:391-405.
8. Allison T., et al. Human extrastriate visual cortex and the perception of faces, words, numbers, and colors. Cereb. Cortex 1994, 4:544-554.
9. Chao L.L., et al. Attribute-based neural substrates in posterior temporal cortex for perceiving and knowing about objects. Nat. Neurosci. 1999, 2:913-919.
10. Kanwisher N. Domain specificity in face perception. Nature 2000, 3:759-763.
11. Mahon B.Z., Caramazza A. Concepts and categories: a cognitive neuropsychological perspective. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2009, 60:1-15.
12. Op de Beeck H.P., et al. Interpreting fMRI data: maps, modules and dimensions. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2008, 9:123-135.
13. Pitcher D., et al. Triple dissociation of faces, bodies, and objects in extrastriate cortex. Curr. Biol. 2009, 19:319-324.
14. Bentin S., et al. Electrophysiological studies of face perception in humans. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 1996, 8:551-565.
15. Kreiman G., et al. Category-specific visual responses of single neurons in the human medial temporal lobe. Nat. Neurosci. 2000, 3:946-953.
16. Cantlon J.F., et al. Cortical representations of symbols, objects, and faces are pruned back during early childhood. Cereb. Cortex 2011, 21:191-199.
17. Haxby J.V., et al. Distributed and overlapping representations of faces and objects in ventral temporal cortex. Science 2001, 293:2425-2430.
18. Carey S., Spelke E. Domain specific knowledge and conceptual change. Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and Culture 1994, 169-200. Cambridge University Press. L. Hirschfeld, S.A. Gelman (Eds.).
19. Fodor J. Modularity of Mind 1983, MIT Press.
20. Pasley B.N., et al. Subcortical discrimination of unperceived objects during binocular rivalry. Neuron 2004, 42:163-172.
21. Vuilleumier P., et al. Distant influences of amygdala lesion on visual cortical activation during emotional face processing. Nat. Neurosci. 2004, 7:1271-1278.
22. Martin A., Weisberg J. Neural foundations for understanding social and mechanical concepts. Cogni. Neuropsychol. 2003, 20:575-587.
23. Mahon B.Z., et al. Action-related properties shape object representations in the ventral stream. Neuron 2007, 55:507-520.
24. Valyear K.F., Culham J.C. Observing learned object-specific functional grasps preferentially activates the ventral stream. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 2010, 22:970-984.
25. Noppeney U., et al. Two distinct neural mechanisms for category-selective responses. Cereb. Cortex 2006, 16:437-445.
26. Rushworth M.F.S., et al. Connection patterns distinguish 3 regions of human parietal cortex. Cereb. Cortex 2006, 16:1418-1430.
27. Astafiev S.V., et al. Extrastriate body area in human occipital cortex responds to the performance of motor actions. Nat. Neurosci. 2004, 7:542-548.
28. Orlov T., et al. Topographic representation of the human body in the occipitotemporal cortex. Neuron 2010, 68:586-600.
29. Peelen M.V., Caramazza A. What body parts reveal about the organization of the brain. Neuron 2010, 68:331-333.
30. Dehaene S., et al. The neural code for written words: a proposal. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2005, 9:335-341.
31. Martin A. Shades of Déjerine - forging a causal link between the visual word form area and reading. Neuron 2006, 50:173-190.
32. Bar M., Aminoff E. Cortical analysis of visual context. Neuron 2003, 38:347-358.
33. Riesenhuber M. Appearance isn't everything: news on object representation in cortex. Neuron 2007, 55:341-344.
34. Op de Beeck H.P., et al. Discrimination training alters object representations in human extrastriate cortex. J. Neurosci. 2006, 26:13025-13036.
35. Tanaka K., et al. Coding visual images of objects in the inferotemporal cortex of the macaque monkey. J. Neurophysiol. 1991, 66:170-189.
36. Felleman D.J., Van Essen D.C. Distributed hierarchical processing in primate visual cortex. Cereb. Cortex 1991, 1:1-47.
37. Levy I., et al. Center-periphery organization of human object areas. Nat. Neurosci. 2001, 4:533-539.
38. Gauthier I., et al. Activation of the middle fusiform 'face area' increases with expertise in recognizing novel objects. Nat. Neurosci. 1999, 2:568-573.
39. Rogers T.T., et al. Fusiform activation to animals is driven by the process, not the stimulus. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 2005, 17:434-445.
40. Mechelli A, et al. Semantic relevance explains category effects in medial fusiform gyri. Neuroimage 2006, 3:992-1002.
41. Tyler L.K., et al. Do semantic categories activate distinct cortical regions? Evidence for a distributed neural semantic system. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 2003, 20:541-559.
42. Buchel C., et al. A multimodal language region in the ventral visual pathway. Nature 1998, 394:274-277.
43. Pietrini P., et al. Beyond sensory images: object-based representation in the human ventral pathway. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101:5658-5663.
44. Mahon B.Z., et al. Category-specific organization in the human brain does not require visual experience. Neuron 2009, 63:397-405.
45. Kveraga K., et al. Magnocellular projections as the trigger of top-down facilitation in recognition. J. Neurosci. 2007, 27:13232-13240.
46. Miller E.K., et al. Neural correlates of categories and concepts. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 2003, 13:198-203.
47. Lewontin R. The Triple Helix: Genes, Organisms, and Environment 2000, Harvard University Press.
48. Park J., et al. Face processing: the interplay of nature and nurture. Neuroscientist 2009, 15:445-449.
49. Zhu Q., et al. Heritability of the specific cognitive ability of face perception. Curr. Biol. 2010, 20:137-142.
50. Polk T.A., et al. Nature versus nurture in ventral visual cortex: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study of twins. J. Neurosci. 2007, 27:13921-13925.
51. Wilmer J., et al. Human face recognition ability is specific and highly heritable. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2010, 107:5238-5241.
52. Duchaine B., Nakayama K. The Cambridge Face Memory Test: results for neurologically intact individuals and an investigation of its validity using inverted face stimuli and prosopagnosic subjects. Neuropsychologia 2006, 44:576-585.
53. Zhu Q., et al. Heritability of the specific cognitive ability of face perception. Curr. Biol. 2010, 20:1-6.
54. Duchaine B.C., et al. Prosopagnosia as an impairment to face specific mechanisms: elimination of the alternative hypotheses in a developmental case. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 2006, 23:714-747.
55. Thomas C., et al. Reduced structural connectivity in ventral visual cortex in congenital prosopagnosia. Nat. Neurosci. 2009, 12:29-31.
56. Kiani R., et al. Object category structure in response patterns of neuronal population in monkey inferior temporal cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 2007, 97:4296-4309.
57. Tsao D.Y., et al. A cortical region consisting entirely of face-selective cells. Science 2006, 311:670-674.
58. Parr L.A., et al. Face processing in the chimpanzee brain. Curr. Biol. 2009, 19:50-53.
59. Op de Beeck H., et al. Inferotemporal neurons represent low-dimensional configurations of parameterized shapes. Nat. Neurosci. 2001, 4:1244-1252.
60. Kriegeskorte N., et al. Matching categorical object representations in inferior temporal cortex of man and monkey. Neuron 2008, 60:1126-1141.
61. Mahon B.Z., Caramazza A. A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content. J. Physiol. Paris 2008, 102:59-70.
62. Damasio H., et al. Neural systems behind word and concept retrieval. Cognition 2004, 92:179-229.
63. Patterson K., et al. Where do you know what you know? The representation of semantic knowledge in the human brain?. Nat. Rev. 2007, 8:976-987.
64. Fang F., He S. Cortical responses to invisible objects in the human dorsal and ventral pathways. Nat. Neurosci. 2005, 8:1380-1385.
65. Almeida J., et al. Unconscious processing dissociates along categorical lines. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2008, 105:15214-15218.
66. Goodale M.A., Milner A.D. Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends Neurosci. 1992, 15:20-25.
67. Kriegeskorte N., et al. Matching categorical object representations in inferior temporal cortex of man and monkey. Neuron 2008, 60:1126-1141.
68. Farah M.J., Rabinowitz C. Genetic and environmental influences on the organization of semantic memory in the brain: Is "living things" an innate category?. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 2003, 20:401-408.
69. New J., et al. Category-specific attention for animals reflects ancestral priorities, not expertise. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2007, 104:16598-16603.
70. Thorpe S., et al. Speed of processing in the human visual system. Nature 1996, 381:520-522.