Cross-modal processing in the occipito-temporal cortex: A TMS study of the müller-lyer illusion

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Volumn 23, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 1987-1997

  Mancini, Flavia ^a,b   Bolognini, Nadia ^a,b   Bricolo, Emanuela ^a   Vallar, Giuseppe ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MILANO BICOCCA   (Italy)

^b ISTITUTO AUXOLOGICO ITALIANO   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEMISPHERE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; HYPOTHESIS; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; OCCIPITAL CORTEX; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TEMPORAL CORTEX; TRANSCRANIAL MAGNETIC STIMULATION; VISUAL ILLUSION;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BRAIN MAPPING; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HAND; HUMANS; ILLUSIONS; MALE; NEURAL PATHWAYS; OCCIPITAL LOBE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PHYSICAL STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TEMPORAL LOBE; TOUCH; TRANSCRANIAL MAGNETIC STIMULATION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79957951251     PISSN: 0898929X     EISSN: 15308898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/jocn.2010.21561     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Amedi, A., Jacobson, G., Hendler, T., Malach, R., & Zohary, E. (2002). Convergence of visual and tactile shape processing in the human lateral occipital complex. Cerebral Cortex, 12, 1202-1212.
2. Amedi, A., Malach, R., Hendler, T., Peled, S., & Zohary, E. (2001). Visuo-haptic object-related activation in the ventral visual pathway. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 324-330.
3. Amedi, A., Raz, N., Azulay, H., Malach, R., & Zohary, E. (2010). Cortical activity during tactile exploration of objects in blind and sighted humans. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, 28, 143-156.
4. Amedi, A., Stern, W. M., Camprodon, J. A., Bermpohl, F., Merabet, L., Rotman, S., et al. (2007). Shape conveyed by visual-to-auditory sensory substitution activates the lateral occipital complex. Nature Neuroscience, 10, 687-689.
5. Beauchamp, M. S. (2005). See me, hear me, touch me: Multisensory integration in lateral occipital-temporal cortex. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 15, 145-153.
6. Bolognini, N., & Maravita, A. (2007). Proprioceptive alignment of visual and somatosensory maps in the posterior parietal cortex. Current Biology, 17, 1890-1895.
7. Bolognini, N., Miniussi, C., Savazzi, S., Bricolo, E., & Maravita, A. (2009). TMS modulation of visual and auditory processing in the posterior parietal cortex. Experimental Brain Research, 195, 509-517.
8. Boroojerdi, B., Prager, A., Muellbacher, W., & Cohen, L. G. (2000). Reduction of human visual cortex excitability using 1-Hz transcranial magnetic stimulation. Neurology, 54, 1529-1531.
9. Bushara, K. O., Weeks, R. A., Ishii, K., Catalan, M. J., Tian, B., Rauschecker, J. P., et al. (1999). Modality-specific frontal and parietal areas for auditory and visual spatial localization in humans. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 759-766.
10. Cappelletti, M., Barth, H., Fregni, F., Spelke, E. S., & Pascual-Leone, A. (2007). rTMS over the intraparietal sulcus disrupts numerosity processing. Experimental Brain Research, 179, 631-642.
11. Chen, R., Classen, J., Gerloff, C., Celnik, P., Wassermann, E. M., Hallett, M., et al. (1997). Depression of motor cortex excitability by low-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation. Neurology, 48, 1398-1403.
12. Ciçek, M., Deouell, L. Y., & Knight, R. T. (2009). Brain activity during landmark and line bisection tasks. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 3, 7.
13. Corbetta, M., Shulman, G. L., Miezin, F. M., & Petersen, S. E. (1995). Superior parietal cortex activation during spatial attention shifts and visual feature conjunction. Science, 270, 802-805.
14. Coren, S., & Girgus, J. S. (1978). Visual illusions. In R. Held, H. W. Leibowitz, & H.-L. Teuber (Eds.), Handbook of sensory physiology. Perception (Vol. 8, pp. 548-568). Berlin: Springer.
15. Coulthard, E., Parton, A., & Husain, M. (2006). Action control in visual neglect. Neuropsychologia, 44, 2717-2733.
16. Daini, R., Angelelli, P., Antonucci, G., Cappa, S. F., & Vallar, G. (2002). Exploring the syndrome of spatial unilateral neglect through an illusion of length. Experimental Brain Research, 144, 224-237.
17. Deshpande, G., Hu, X., Lacey, S., Stilla, R., & Sathian, K. (2010). Object familiarity modulates effective connectivity during haptic shape perception. Neuroimage, 49, 1991-2000.
18. Deshpande, G., Hu, X., Stilla, R., & Sathian, K. (2008). Effective connectivity during haptic perception: A study using Granger causality analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging data. Neuroimage, 40, 1807-1814.
19. Fierro, B., Brighina, F., Oliveri, M., Piazza, A., La Bua, V., Buffa, D., et al. (2000). Contralateral neglect induced by right posterior parietal rTMS in healthy subjects. NeuroReport, 11, 1519-1521.
20. Fink, G. R., Marshall, J. C., Shah, N. J., Weiss, P. H., Halligan, P. W., Grosse-Ruyken, M., et al. (2000). Line bisection judgments implicate right parietal cortex and cerebellum as assessed by fMRI. Neurology, 54, 1324-1331.
21. Fink, G. R., Marshall, J. C., Weiss, P. H., Stephan, T., Grefkes, C., Shah, N. J., et al. (2003). Performing allocentric visuospatial judgments with induced distortion of the egocentric reference frame: An fMRI study with clinical implications. Neuroimage, 20, 1505-1517.
22. Frisby, J. P., & Davies, I. R. (1971). Is the haptic Müller-Lyer a visual phenomenon? Nature, 231, 463-465.
23. Gallace, A., & Spence, C. (2005). Examining the crossmodal consequences of viewing the Müller-Lyer illusion. Experimental Brain Research, 162, 490-496.
24. Gentaz, E., & Hatwell, Y. (2004). Geometrical haptic illusions: The role of exploration in the Müller-Lyer, vertical-horizontal, and Delboeuf illusions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 31-40.
25. Gepshtein, S., Burge, J., Ernst, M. O., & Banks, M. S. (2005). The combination of vision and touch depends on spatial proximity. Journal of Vision, 5, 1013-1023.
26. Grill-Spector, K. (2003). The neural basis of object perception. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 13, 159-166.
27. Harris, I. M., & Miniussi, C. (2003). Parietal lobe contribution to mental rotation demonstrated with rTMS. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 315-323.
28. Heller, M. A., Brackett, D. D., Wilson, K., Yoneyama, K., Boyer, A., & Steffen, H. (2002). The haptic Müller-Lyer illusion in sighted and blind people. Perception, 31, 1263-1274.
29. Holding, D. H. (1970). Notes and discussion. A line illusion with irrelevant depth cues. American Journal of Psychology, 83, 280-282.
30. James, T. W., Humphrey, G. K., Gati, J. S., Servos, P., Menon, R. S., & Goodale, M. A. (2002). Haptic study of three-dimensional objects activates extrastriate visual areas. Neuropsychologia, 40, 1706-1714.
31. Judd, C. H. (1899). A study of geometrical illusions. Psychological Review, 6, 241-261.
32. Kim, S., & James, T. W. (2010). Enhanced effectiveness in visuo-haptic object-selective brain regions with increasing stimulus salience. Human Brain Mapping, 31, 678-693.
33. Knecht, S., Ellger, T., Breitenstein, C., Bernd Ringelstein, E., & Henningsen, H. (2003). Changing cortical excitability with low-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation can induce sustained disruption of tactile perception. Biological Psychiatry, 53, 175-179.
34. Kourtzi, Z., & Kanwisher, N. (2001). Representation of perceived object shape by the human lateral occipital complex. Science, 293, 1506-1509.
35. Lacey, S., Flueckiger, P., Stilla, R., Lava, M., & Sathian, K. (2010). Object familiarity modulates the relationship between visual object imagery and haptic shape perception. Neuroimage, 49, 1977-1990.
36. Lacey, S., Tal, N., Amedi, A., & Sathian, K. (2009). A putative model of multisensory object representation. Brain Topography, 21, 269-274.
37. Malach, R., Reppas, J. B., Benson, R. R., Kwong, K. K., Jiang, H., Kennedy, W. A., et al. (1995). Object-related activity revealed by functional magnetic resonance imaging in human occipital cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., 92, 8135-8139.
38. Mancini, F., Bricolo, E., & Vallar, G. (2010). Multisensory integration in the Müller-Lyer illusion: From vision to haptics. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 818-830.
39. Merabet, L., Thut, G., Murray, B., Andrews, J., Hsiao, S., & Pascual-Leone, A. (2004). Feeling by sight or seeing by touch? Neuron, 42, 173-179.
40. Millar, S., & Al-Attar, Z. (2002). The Müller-Lyer illusion in touch and vision: Implications for multisensory processes. Perception and Psychophysics, 64, 353-365.
41. Molholm, S., Sehatpour, P., Mehta, A. D., Shpaner, M., Gomez-Ramirez, M., Ortigue, S., et al. (2006). Audio-visual multisensory integration in superior parietal lobule revealed by human intracranial recordings. Journal of Neurophysiology, 96, 721-729.
42. Müller-Lyer, F. C. (1889). Optische Urteilstäuschungen. Archiv für Physiologie, Suppl., 263-270.
43. Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97-113.
44. Oliveri, M., & Vallar, G. (2009). Parietal versus temporal lobe components in spatial cognition: Setting the mid-point of a horizontal line. Journal of Neuropsychology, 3, 201-211.
45. Over, R. (1966). A comparison of haptic and visual judgments of some illusions. American Journal of Psychology, 79, 590-595.
46. Over, R. (1967). Haptic illusions and inappropriate constancy scaling. Nature, 214, 629.
47. Pascual-Leone, A., Walsh, V., & Rothwell, J. (2000). Transcranial magnetic stimulation in cognitive neuroscience: Virtual lesion, chronometry, and functional connectivity. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 10, 232-237.
48. Peltier, S., Stilla, R., Mariola, E., LaConte, S., Hu, X., & Sathian, K. (2007). Activity and effective connectivity of parietal and occipital cortical regions during haptic shape perception. Neuropsychologia, 45, 476-483.
49. Pietrini, P., Furey, M. L., Ricciardi, E., Gobbini, M. I., Wu, W. H., & Cohen, L. G. (2004). Beyond sensory images: Object-based representation in the human ventral pathway. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., 101, 5858-5663.
50. Pourtois, G., Schwartz, S., Spiridon, M., Martuzzi, R., & Vuilleumier, P. (2009). Object representations for multiple visual categories overlap in lateral occipital and medial fusiform cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 19, 1806-1819.
51. Qiu, J., Li, H., Zhang, Q., Liu, Q., & Zhang, F. (2008). The Müller-Lyer illusion seen by the brain: An eventrelated brain potentials study. Biological Psychology, 77, 150-158.
52. Rorden, C., Fruhmann Berger, M., & Karnath, H. O. (2006). Disturbed line bisection is associated with posterior brain lesions. Brain Research, 1080, 17-25.
53. Rossi, S., Hallett, M., Rossini, P. M., & Pascual-Leone, A. (2009). Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research. Clinical Neurophysiology, 120, 2008-2039.
54. Rudel, R. G., & Teuber, H.-L. (1963). Decrement of visual and haptic Müller-Lyer illusion on repeated trials: A study of crossmodal transfer. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 15, 125-131.
55. Sack, A. T., Cohen Kadosh, R., Schuhmann, T., Moerel, M., Walsh, V., & Goebel, R. (2009). Optimizing functional accuracy of TMS in cognitive studies: A comparison of methods. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21, 207-221.
56. Sparing, R., Buelte, D., Meister, I. G., Paus, T., & Fink, G. R. (2008). Transcranial magnetic stimulation and the challenge of coil placement: A comparison of conventional and stereotaxic neuronavigational strategies. Human Brain Mapping, 29, 82-96.
57. Stein, B. E. (1998). Neural mechanisms for synthesizing sensory information and producing adaptive behaviors. Experimental Brain Research, 123, 124-135.
58. Stein, B. E., & Meredith, M. A. (1993). The merging of the senses. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
59. Suzuki, K., & Arashida, R. (1992). Geometrical haptic illusions revisited: Haptic illusions compared with visual illusions. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, 329-335.
60. Tal, N., & Amedi, A. (2009). Multisensory visual-tactile object related network in humans: Insights gained using a novel crossmodal adaptation approach. Experimental Brain Research, 198, 165-182.
61. Talairach, J., & Tournoux, P. (1988). A co-planar stereotactic atlas of the human brain. Stuttgart: Thieme Verlag.
62. Tanabe, H. C., Kato, M., Miyauchi, S., Hayashi, S., &Yanagida, T. (2005). The sensorimotor transformation of cross-modal spatial information in the anterior intraparietal sulcus as revealed by functional MRI. Brain Research, Cognitive Brain Research, 22, 385-396.
63. Vallar, G., & Daini, R. (2006). Visual perceptual processing in unilateral spatial neglect: The case of visual illusions. In T. Vecchi & G. Bottini (Eds.), Imagery and spatial cognition: Methods, models and cognitive assessment (pp. 337-362). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
64. Verdon, V., Schwartz, S., Lovblad, K. O., Hauert, C. A., & Vuilleumier, P. (2010). Neuroanatomy of hemispatial neglect and its functional components: A study using voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping. Brain, 133, 880-894.
65. Walker, J. T. (1971). Visual capture in visual illusions. Perception & Psychophysics, 10, 71-74.
66. Walsh, V., & Cowey, A. (2000). Transcranial magnetic stimulation and cognitive neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 1, 73-79.
67. Wassermann, E. M., Epstein, C. M., Ziemann, U., Walsh, V., Paus, T., & Lisanby, S. H. (Eds.) (2008). The Oxford handbook of transcranial stimulation. New York: Oxford University Press.
68. Weidner, R., Boers, F., Mathiak, K., Dammers, J., & Fink, G. R. (2010). The temporal dynamics of the Müller-Lyer illusion. Cerebral Cortex, 20, 1586-1595.
69. Weidner, R., & Fink, G. R. (2007). The neural mechanisms underlying the Müller-Lyer illusion and its interaction with visuospatial judgments. Cerebral Cortex, 17, 878-884.
70. Yantis, S., & Serences, J. T. (2003). Cortical mechanisms of space-based and object-based attentional control. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 13, 187-193.