Domain general mechanisms account for imagined transformations of whole body perspective

Acta Psychologica

Volumn 137, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 371-381

  Gardner, Mark R ^a   Potts, Rosalind ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTMINSTER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Embodiment; Mental rotation; Own body transformation; Perspective taking; Spatial compatibility; Temporoparietal junction

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FEMALE; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; IMAGINATION; MALE; ORIENTATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; IMAGINATION; JUDGMENT; MALE; ORIENTATION; REACTION TIME; SPACE PERCEPTION;

EID: 79958134873     PISSN: 00016918     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.04.006     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Anzola G., Bertoloni G., Buchtel H., Rizolatti G. Spatial compatibility and anatomical factors in simple and choice reaction time. Neuropsychologia 1977, 15:295-302.
2. Arzy S., Mohr C., Michel C., Blanke O. Duration and not strength of activation in temporo-parietal cortex positively correlates with schizotypy. NeuroImage 2007, 35:326-333.
3. Arzy S., Seeck M., Ortigue S., Spinelli L., Blanke O. Induction of an illusory shadow person. Nature 2006, 443:287.
4. Arzy S., Thut G., Mohr C., Michel C., Blanke O. Neural basis of embodiment: Distinct contributions of temporoparietal junction and extrastriate body area. The Journal of Neuroscience 2006, 26:8074-8081.
5. Blanke O., Ionta S., Fornari E., Mohr C., Maeder P. Mental imagery for full and upper human bodies: Common right hemisphere activations and distinct extrastriate activations. Brain Topography 2010, 23:321-332.
6. Blanke O., Mohr C., Michel C., Leone A., Brugger P., Seeck M., et al. Linking out-of-body experience and self processing to mental own-body imagery at the temporoparietal junction. The Journal of Neuroscience 2005, 25:550-557.
7. Blanke O., Ortigue S., Landis T., Seeck M. Stimulating illusory own-body perceptions. Nature 2002, 419:269-270.
8. Brebner J., Shepard M., Cairney P. Spatial relationships and S-R compatibility. Acta Psychologica 1972, 36:1-15.
9. Chiavarino C., Apperly I., Humphreys G. Exploring the functional and anatomical bases of mirror-image and anatomical imitation: The role of the frontal lobes. Neuropsychologia 2007, 45:784-795.
10. De Ridder D., Van Laere K., Dupont P., Menovsky T., Van der Heyning P. Visualizing out-of-body experience in the brain. The New England Journal of Medicine 2007, 357:1829-1833.
11. Decety J., Lamm C. The role of the right temporoparietal junction in social interaction: how low-level cognitive processes contribute to meta-cognition. The Neuroscientist 2007, 13:580-593.
12. Decety J., Sommerville J. Shared representations between self and others: a social cognitive neuroscience view. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2003, 7:527-533.
13. Gardner M., Potts R. Hand dominance influences the processing of observed bodies. Brain and Cognition 2010, 73:35-40.
14. Harris I., Egan G., Sonkkila C., Tochon-Danguy H., Paxinos G., Watson J. Selective right parietal lobe activation during mental rotation. Brain 2000, 123:65-73.
15. Heyes C., Ray E. Spatial S-R compatibility effects in an intentional imitation task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2004, 11:703-708.
16. Hommel B. The role of attention for the Simon effect. Psychological Research 1993, 55:208-222.
17. Hommel B., Lippa Y. S-R compatibility effects due to context-dependent spatial stimulus coding. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1995, 2:370-374.
18. Iacobini M., Woods R., Maziotta J. Brain-behaviour relationships: Evidence from practice effects in spatial stimulus-response compatibility. Journal of Neurophysiology 1996, 76:321-331.
19. Ishikura T., Inomata K. Effects of angle of model demonstration on learning of motor skill. Perceptual and Motor Skills 1995, 80:651-658.
20. Jackson P., Meltzoff A., Decety J. Neural circuits involved in imitation and perspective-taking. NeuroImage 2006, 31:429-439.
21. Jellema T., Perrett D.I. Neural representation of perceived bodily actions using a categorical frame of reference. Neuropsychologica 2006, 44:1535-1546.
22. Jordan K., Heinze H., Lutz K., Kanowski M., Jancke I. Cortical activation during the mental rotation of different visual objects. NeuroImage 2001, 13:143-152.
23. Kaiser S., Walther S., Nennig E., Kronmuller K., Mundt C., Weisbrod M., et al. Gender-specific strategy use and neural correlates in a spatial perspective taking task. Neuropsychologia 2008, 46:2524-2531.
24. Kilner J., Marchant J., Frith C. Relationship between activity in human primary motor cortex during action observation and the mirror neuron system. PloS One 2009, 4(3):e4925.
25. Kornblum S., Hasbroucq T., Osman A. Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility - A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review 1990, 97:253-270.
26. Kornblum S., Lee J. Stimulus-response compatibility with relevant and irrelevant stimulus dimensions that do and do not overlap with the response. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 1995, 21:855-875.
27. Mitchell J. Activity in right temporo-parietal junction is not selective for theory-of-mind. Cerebral Cortex 2008, 18:262-271.
28. Mohr C., Blanke O., Brugger P. Perceptual aberrations impair mental own-body transformations. Behavioural Neuroscience 2006, 120:528-534.
29. Monsell S. Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2003, 7:134-140.
30. Nicoletti R., Umilta C., Lavadas E. Compatibility due to coding of the relative position of the effectors. Acta Psychologica 1984, 57:133-143.
31. Ottoboni G., Tessari A., Cubelli R., Umiltà C. Is handedness recognition automatic? A study using a Simon-like paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 2005, 31:778-789.
32. Parsons L. Imagined spatial transformations of one's body. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1987, 116:172-191.
33. Podzebenko K., Egan G., Watson J. Widespread dorsal stream activation during a parametric mental rotation task, revealed with functional magnetic resonance imaging. NeuroImage 2002, 15:547-558.
34. Prinz W. Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 1997, 9:129-154.
35. Proctor R., Dutta A. Do the same stimulus-response relations influence choice reactions initially and after practice?. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1993, 19:922-930.
36. Proctor R., Lu C., Wang C., Dutta A. Activation of response codes by relevant and irrelevant stimulus information. Acta Psychologica 1995, 90:275-286.
37. Proctor R., Vu K. Stimulus-response compatibility principles: Data, theory, and application 2006, CRC Press, Boca Raton.
38. Proctor R., Wang H., Vu K. Influences of different combinations of conceptual, perceptual, and structural similarity on stimulus-response compatibility. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. A: Human Experimental Psychology 2002, 55A:59-74.
39. Ratcliff G. Spatial thought, mental rotation and the right cerebral hemisphere. Neuropsychologia 1979, 17:49-54.
40. Rosenthal R. Meta-analytic procedures for social research 1991, Sage, London.
41. Schneider W., Eschman A., Zuccolotto A. E-Prime: User's guide 2002, Psychology Software Tools Inc., Pittsburgh.
42. Schumacher E., Cole M., D'Esposito M. Selection and maintenance of stimulus-response rules during preparation and performance of a spatial choice-reaction task. Brain Research 2007, 1136:77-87.
43. Schumacher E., D'Esposito M. Neural implementation of response selection in humans as revealed by localized effects of stimulus-response compatibility on brain activation. Human Brain Mapping 2002, 17:193-201.
44. Shaffer L. Choice reaction with variable S-R mapping. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1965, 70:284-288.
45. Simon J., Hinrichs J., Craft J. Auditory SR compatibility. Reaction time as a function of ear-hand correspondence and ear-response-location correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1970, 86:97-102.
46. Snedecor G.W., Cochran W.G. Statistical methods 1967, Iowa State University Press, Ames. 6th Edn.
47. Umilta C., Nicoletti R. Spatial stimulus-response compatibility. Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective 1990, 89-116. Elsevier, Amsterdam. R. Proctor, T. Reeve (Eds.).
48. Vu K., Proctor R. Mixing compatible and incompatible mappings: elimination, reduction, and enhancement of spatial compatibility effects. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2004, 57A:539-556.
49. Wallace R. S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1971, 88:354-360.
50. Wang H., Proctor R. Stimulus-response compatibility as a function of stimulus code and response modality. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 1996, 22:1201-1217.
51. Wapner S., Cirillo L. Imitation of a model's hand movements: Age changes in transposition of left-right relations. Child Development 1968, 39:887-894.
52. Williams J., Waiter G., Gilchrist A., Perrett D., Murray A., Whiten A. Neural mechanisms of imitation and "mirror neuron" functioning in autistic spectrum disorder. Neuropsychologia 2006, 44:610-621.
53. Zacks J., Gilliam F., Ojemann J. Selective disturbance of mental rotation by cortical stimulation. Neuropsychologia 2003, 41:1659-1667.
54. Zacks J., Ollinger J., Sheridan M., Tversky B. A parametric study of mental spatial transformations of bodies. NeuroImage 2002, 16:857-872.
55. Zacks J., Rypma B., Gabrieli J.D.E., Tversky B., Glover G.H. Imagined transformations of bodies: An fMRI investigation. Neuropsychologia 1999, 37:1029-1040.