The question shapes the answer: The neural correlates of task differences reveal dynamic semantic processing

Brain and Language

Volumn 120, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 73-78

  Hargreaves, Ian S ^a,c   White, Michelle ^a   Pexman, Penny M ^a,c   Pittman, Dan ^b   Goodyear, Brad G ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

Author keywords

FMRI; Lexical semantic; Semantic categorization task; Semantic processing

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN FUNCTION; BRAIN NERVE CELL; BRAIN REGION; CELL ACTIVATION; CELL ACTIVITY; CELL FUNCTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LANGUAGE PROCESSING; MALE; NEUROMODULATION; NORMAL HUMAN; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; SEMANTICS; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE;

ANIMALS; BRAIN; BRAIN MAPPING; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; SEMANTICS;

EID: 84855349408     PISSN: 0093934X     EISSN: 10902155     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2011.10.004     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Barsalou L.W. Context-independent and context-dependent information in concepts. Memory & Cognition 1982, 10:82-93.
2. Beckmann C., Jenkinson M., Smith S.M. General multi-level linear modeling for group analysis in fMRI. NeuroImage 2003, 20:1052-1063.
3. Binder J., Desai R., Graves W., Conant L. Where is the semantic system? A critical review and meta-analysis of 120 functional neuroimaging studies. Cerebral Cortex 2009, 19:2767-2796.
4. Birn R.M., Cox R.W., Bandettini P.A. Detection versus estimation in event-related fMRI: Choosing the optimal stimulus timing. NeuroImage 2002, 15:252-264.
5. Coltheart M., Davelaar E., Johnasson J., Besner D. Access to the internal lexicon. Attention and performance VI 1977, 535-555. Erlbaum, Hilldale, NJ. S. Dornic (Ed.).
6. Damasio H., Grabowski T.J., Tranel D., Hichwa R.D., Damasio A. A neural basis for lexical retrieval. Nature 2004, 380:499-505.
7. Demb J.B., Desmond J.E., Wagner A.D., Vaidya C.J., Glover G.H., Gabrieli J.D.E. Semantic encoding and retrieval in the left inferior prefrontal cortex: A functional MRI study of task difficulty and process specificity. Journal of Neuroscience 1995, 15:5870-5878.
8. Fodor J.A. The language of thought 1975, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
9. Forster K.I., Shen D. No enemies in the neighborhood: Absence of inhibitory neighborhood effects in lexical decision and semantic categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1996, 22:696-713.
10. Gilhooly K.J., Hay D. Imagery, concreteness, age of acquisition, familiarity, and meaningfulness values for 205 five-letter words having single-solution anagrams. Behavioral Research Methods Instruments & Computers 1977, 9:12-17.
11. Hargreaves I.S., Pexman P.M., Pittman D.J., Goodyear B.G. Tolerating ambiguity: Ambiguous words recruit the left inferior frontal gyrus in absence of a behavioral effect. Experimental Psychology 2011, 58:19-30.
12. Hino Y., Pexman P.M., Lupker S.J. Ambiguity and relatedness effects in semantic tasks: Are they due to semantic coding?. Journal of Memory and Language 2006, 55:247-273.
13. Hoenig K., Sim E.-J., Bochev V., Herrnberger B., Kiefer M. Conceptual flexibility in the human brain: Dynamic recruitment of semantic maps from visual, motor, and motion-related areas. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2008, 20:1799-1814.
14. Jenkinson M., Bannister P., Brady M., Smith S. Improved optimization for the robust and accurate linear registration and motion correction of brain images. NeuroImage 2002, 17:825-841.
15. Jenkinson M., Smith S.M. A global optimization method for robust affine registration of brain images. Medical Image Analysis 2001, 5:143-156.
16. Kiefer, M., & Pulvermüller, F. (in press). Conceptual representations in mind and brain: Theoretical developments, current evidence, and future directions. Cortex. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2011.04.006.
17. Kiefer M., Martens U. Attentional sensitization of unconscious cognition: Task sets modulate subsequent masked semantic priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2010, 139:464-489.
18. Kucera H., Francis W.N. Computational analysis of present-day American English 1967, Brown University Press, Providence.
19. Mahon B.Z., Caramazza A. A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content. Journal of Physiology -Paris 2008, 102:59-70.
20. McRae K., Cree G.S., Seidenberg M.S., McNorgan C. Semantic feature production norms for a large set of living and nonliving things. Behavior Research Methods 2005, 37:547-559.
21. McRae K., de Sa V.R., Seidenberg M.S. On the nature and scope of featural representations of word meaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1997, 88:99-130.
22. Moore C.J., Price C.J. A functional neuroimaging study of the variables that generate category-specific object processing differences. Brain 1999, 122:943-962.
23. Moss H.E., Rodd J.M., Stamatakis E.A., Bright P., Tyler L.K. Anteromedial temporal cortex supports fine-grained differentiation among objects. Cerebral Cortex 2005, 15:616-627.
24. Moss J.E., Tyler L.K. A progressive category-specific semantic deficit for non-living things. Neuropsychologia 2000, 38:60-82.
25. Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., & Schreiber, T. A. (1998). The University of South Florida word association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. http://www.usf.edu/FreeAssociation.
26. Pexman P., Hargreaves I., Siakaluk P., Bodner G., Pope J. There are many ways to be rich: Effects of three measures of semantic richness on visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 2008, 15:161-167.
27. Pexman P., Holyk G., Monfils M. Number-of-features effects and semantic processing. Memory & Cognition 2003, 31(6):842-855.
28. Pexman P., Lupker S., Jared D. Homophone effects in lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 2001, 27(1):139-156.
29. Phillips J.A., Noppeney U., Humphreys G.W., Price C.J. Can segregation within the semantic system account for category-specific semantic deficits?. Brain 2002, 125:2067-2080.
30. Poldrack R., Wagner A. What can neuroimaging tell us about the mind? Insights from prefrontal cortex. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2004, 13:177-181.
31. Rogers R.D., Owen A.M., Middleton J.C., Williams E.J., Pickard J.D., Sahakian B.J., et al. Choosing between small, likely rewards and large, unlikely rewards activates inferior and orbital prefrontal cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 1999, 20:9029-9038.
32. Roskies A.L., Fiez J.A., Balota D.A., Raichle M.E., Petersen S.E. Task-dependent modulation of regions in the left inferior prefrontal cortex during semantic processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2001, 13:829-843.
33. Ruff I., Blumstein S.E., Myers E.B., Hutchison E. Recruitment of anterior and posterior structures in lexical-semantic processing: An fMRI study comparing implicit and explicit tasks. Brain & Language 2008, 105:41-49.
34. Sears C.R., Lupker S.J., Hino Y. Orthographic neighborhood effects in perceptual identification and semantic categorization task: A test of the multiple read-out model. Perception & Psychophysics 1999, 61:1537-1554.
35. Simmons W.K., Barsalou L.W. The similarity-in-topography principle: Reconciling theories of conceptual deficits. Cognitive Neuropsychology 2003, 20:451-486.
36. Smith S. Fast robust automated brain extraction. Human Brain Mapping 2002, 17:143-155.
37. Talairach J., Tournoux P. Co-planar stereotaxic atlas of the human brain 1988, Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc, New York.
38. Tyler L., Bright P., Dick E., Tavares L., Pilgrim P., Fletcher M., et al. Do semantic categories activate distinct cortical regions? Evidence for a distributed neural semantic system. Cognitive Neuropsychology 2003, 20:541-559.
39. Volz K.G., Schubotz R.I., von Cramon D.Y. Variants of uncertainty in decision-making and their neural correlates. Brain Research Bulletin 2005, 67:403-412.
40. Whitney C., Grossman M., Kircher T. The influence of multiple primes on bottom-up and top-down regulation during meaning retrieval: Evidence from 2 distinct neural networks. Cerebral Cortex 2009, 19:2548-2560.
41. Woolrich M.W., Behrens T.E.J., Beckmann C.F., Jenkinson M., Smith S.M. Multi-level linear modeling for fMRI group analysis using Bayesian inference. NeuroImage 2004, 21:1732-1747.
42. Woolrich M.W., Ripley B.D., Brady J.M., Smith S.M. Temporal autocorrelation in Univariate Linear Modeling of fMRI data. NeuroImage 2001, 14:1370-1386.
43. The educator's word frequency guide 1995, Touchstone Applied Science Associates, Brewster, NJ. S.M. Zeno, S.H. Ivens, R.T. Millard, R. Duvvuri (Eds.).