N300 and Social Affordances: A Study with a Real Person and a Dummy as Stimuli

PLoS ONE

Volumn 7, Issue 10, 2012, Pages

  Debruille, J Bruno ^a,b   Brodeur, Mathieu B ^a,b   Franco Porras, Carolina ^c  

^a DOUGLAS MENTAL HEALTH UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^b MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c Centre d'Higiene Mental les Corts   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; EYE MOVEMENT; FACE; FEMALE; FRONTAL CORTEX; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMAGE DISPLAY; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PERSONAL APPEARANCE; SOCIAL INTERACTION; STIMULUS RESPONSE; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; EYE MOVEMENTS; FACE; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84868267060     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047922     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Zebrowitz LA, Bronstad MP, Montepare JM (2010) An ecological therory of face perception. In: The science of social vision, Reginal B, Adams JR, Nalini Ambady, Ken Nakayama, Shinsuke Shimojo eds. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
2. Gibson JJ (1977) The theory of affordances. In: Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing: Toward an Ecological Psychology, Robert Shaw, John Bransford eds. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 67-82.
3. Gibson JJ (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
4. Barsalou LW, (2008) Grounded cognition. Ann Rev Psychol 59: 617-645.
5. Gibbs RW, Perlman M, (2010) Language understanding is grounded in experiential simulations: a response to Weiskopf. Stud Hist Philos Sci. 41: 305-308.
6. Tucker M, Ellis R, (1998) On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. J of Exp Psychol: Human Percept & Performance 24: 830-846.
7. Symes E, Ellis R, Tucker M, (2005) Dissociating object-based and space-based affordances. Visual Cognition 12: 1337-1361.
8. Tipper SP, Paul MA, Hayes AE, (2006) Vision-for-action: the effects of object property discrimination and action state on affordance compatibility effects. Psychon Bull Rev 13: 493-498.
9. Ellis R, Tucker M, (2000) Micro-affordance: The potentiation of components of action by seen objects. Brit J of Psychol 91: 451-471.
10. Tucker M, Ellis R, (2004) Action priming by briefly presented objects. Acta Psychologica 116: 185-203.
11. Goodale MA, Milner AD, (1992) Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends Neurosci 15: 20-25.
12. Goodale MA, Westwood DA, (2004) An evolving view of duplex vision: separate but interacting cortical pathways for perception and action. Curr Opin Neurobiol 14: 203-211.
13. Cohen YE, Andersen RA, (2002) A common reference frame for movement plans in the posterior parietal cortex. Nat Rev Neurosci 3: 553-562.
14. Chao LL, Martin A, (2000) Representation of manipulable man-made objects in the dorsal stream. Neuroimage 12: 478-484.
15. Mecklinger A, Gruenewald C, Weiskopf N, Doeller CF, (2004) Motor affordance and its role for visual working memory: Evidence from fMRI studies. Exp Psychol 51: 258-269.
16. Decety J, Perani D, Jeannerod M, Bettinardi V, Tadary B, et al. (1994) Mapping motor representations with positron emission tomography. Nature 371: 600-602.
17. Grafton ST, Fadiga L, Arbib MA, Rizzolatti G, (1997) Premotor cortex activation during observation and naming of familiar tools. Neuroimage 6: 231-236.
18. Stephan KM, Fink GR, Passingham RE, Silbersweig D, Ceballos-Baumann AO, et al. (1995) Functional anatomy of the mental representation of upper extremity movements in healthy subjects. J Neurophysiol 73: 373-386.
19. Grezes J, Decety J, (2002) Does visual perception of object afford action? Evidence from a neuroimaging study. Neuropsychologia 40: 212-222.
20. Creem-Regehr SH, Lee JN, (2005) Neural representations of graspable objects: are tools special? Brain Res: Cogn Brain Res 22: 457-469.
21. Kiefer M, Sim EJ, Helbig H, Graf M, (2011) Tracking the Time Course of Action Priming on Object Recognition: Evidence for Fast and Slow Influences of Action on Perception. J Cogn Neurosci 8: 1864-1874.
22. van Elk M, van Schie HT, Bekkering H, (2010) The N400-concreteness effect reflects the retrieval of semantic information during the preparation of meaningful actions. Biol Psychol 85: 134-142.
23. Kutas M, Van Petten C, Kluender M (2006) Psycholinguistics electrified II. In: Handbook of Psycholinguistics, eds. Elsevier Press, New York.
24. Barrett SE, Rugg MD, Perrett DI, (1988) Event-related potentials and the semantic matching of famiiar and unfamiliar faces. Neuropsychologia 26: 105-117.
25. Debruille JB, Pineda J, Renault B, (1996) N400-like potentials elicited by faces and knowledge inhibition. Brain Res: Cogn Brain Res 4: 133-144.
26. McPherson W, Holcomb P, (1999) An electrophysiological investigation of semantic priming with pictures of real objects. Psychophysiol 36: 53-65.
27. Wu YC, Coulson S, (2007) How iconic gestures enhance communication: an ERP study. Brain & Lang 101: 234-245.
28. Allison T, Puce A, Spencer DD, McCarthy G, (1999) Electrophysiological studies of human face perception. I: Potentials generated in occipitotemporal cortex by face and non-face stimuli. Cereb Cortex 9: 415-430.
29. Ganis G, Schendan HE, (2008) Visual mental imagery and perception produce opposite adaptation effects on early brain potentials. Neuroimage 42: 1714-1727.
30. Philiastides MG, Sajda P, (2007) EEG-informed fMRI reveals spatiotemporal characteristics of perceptual decision making. J Neurosci 27: 13082-13091.
31. Schendan HZ, Maher SM, (2009) Object knowledge during entry-level categorization is activated and modified by implicit memory after 200 ms. Neuroimage 44: 1423-1438.
32. Sehatpour P, Molholm S, Javitt DC, Foxe JJ, (2006) Spatiotemporal dynamics of human object recognition processing: an integrated high-density electrical mapping and functional imaging study of "closure" processes. Neuroimage 29: 605-618.
33. Schendan HE, Lucia LC, (2010) Object-sensitive activity reflects earlier perceptual and later cognitive processing of visual objects between 95 and 500 ms. Brain Res 1329: 124-141.
34. Kable JW, Chatterjee A, (2006) Specificity of action representations in the lateral occipitotemporal cortex. J Cogn Neurosci 18: 1498-1517.
35. Wiggett AJ, Downing PE, (2011) Representation of Action in Occipito-temporal Cortex. J Cogn Neurosci 23: 1765-1780.
36. Electrode position nomenclature committee, 1991 American electroencepha-lographic society guidelines for standard electrode position nomenclature. J Clin Neurophysiol 8: 200-202.
37. Greenhouse GW, Geisser S, (1959) On methods of analysis of profile data. Psychometrika 24: 1582-1589.
38. Kramer AF, Donchin E (1987) Brain potentials as indices of orthographic and phonological interaction during word matching. J Exp Psychol: Learn Mem & Cogn 13, 76-86.
39. Debruille JB, Renoult L, (2009) Effects of semantic matching and of semantic category on reaction time and N400 that resist numerous repetitions. Neuropsychologia 47(2): 506-17.
40. Renoult L, Brodeur MB, Debruille JB, (2010) N400-like potentials and reaction times index semantic processing of highly repeated concepts presented in single-word trials. Biol Psychol 84: 206-220.
41. Renoult L, Debruille JB, (2011a) N400-like potentials index semantic relations between highly repeated individual words. J Cogn Neurosci 23(4): 905-922.
42. Renoult L, Wang X, Mortimer J, Debruille JB, (2011b) Explicit semantic tasks are necessary to study semantic priming effects with high rates of repetition. Clin Neurophysiol 123 (4): 741-54.
43. Besson M, Kutas M, Van Petten C, (1992) An event-related potential analysis of semantic congruity and repetition effects in sentences. J Cogn Neurosci 4: 132-49.
44. Kazmerski VA, Friedman D, (1997) Effect of multiple presentations of words on event-related potential and reaction time repetition effects in Alzheimer's patients and young and older controls. Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol 10: 32-47.
45. Kounios J, Holcomb PJ, (1992) Structure and process in semantic memory: evidence from event-related brain potentials and reaction times. J Exp Psychol: Gen 121: 459-79.
46. Van Strien JW, Hagenbeek RE, Stam CJ, Rombouts SA, Barkhof F, (2005) Changes in brain electrical activity during extended continuous word recognition. Neuroimage 26: 952-9.
47. Young MP, Rugg MD, (1992) Word frequency and multiple repetitions as determinants of the modulation of event-related potentials in a semantic classification task. Psychophysiol 29: 664-76.
48. Woods DL, Alho K, Algazi A, (1992) Intermodal selective attention. I. Effects on event-related potentials to lateralized auditory and visual stimuli. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 82: 341-355.
49. Eimer M, Holmes A, (2007) Event-related brain potential correlates of emotional face processing. Neuropsychologia 45: 15-31.
50. Sitnikova T, West WC, Kuperberg GR, Holcomb PJ, (2006) The neural organization of semantic memory: Electrophysiological activity suggests feature-based segregation. Biol Psychol 71: 326-340.
51. Vachon F, Jolicoeur P, (2012) On the automaticity of semantic processing during task switching. J Cogn Neurosci 24(3): 611-26.
52. Debruille JB, (1998) Knowledge inhibition and N400: a study with words that look like common words. Br. & Lang 62: 202-220.
53. Debruille JB, (2007) The N400 potential could index a semantic inhibition. Br Res Rev 56(2): 472-477.
54. Debruille JB, Ramirez D, Wolf Y, Schaefer A, Nguyen TV, et al. (2008) Knowledge inhibition and N400: a within a a between-subjects study with distractor words. Brain Res 2: 1187, 167-183.
55. Ocklenburg S, Gunturkun O, Beste C, (2011) Lateralised neural mechanisms underlying the modulation of response inhibition processes. Neuroimage 55 (4): 1771-1778.
56. Falkenstein M, Hoormann J, Hohsbein J, (1999) ERP components in Go/Nogo tasks and their relation to inhibition. Acta Psychol. (Amst), 101 (2-3): 267-291.
57. Bruin KJ, Wijers AA, (2002) Inhibition, response mode, and stimulus probability: A comparative event-related potential study. Clin Neurophysiol 113: 1172-1182.
58. Jodo E, Kayama Y, (1992) Relation of a negative ERP component to response inhibition in a Go/No-go task. Electroencephal & Clin Neurophysiol 82: 477-482.
59. Roche RAP, Garavan H, Foxe JJ, O'Mara SM, (2005) Individual differences discriminate event-related potentials but not performance during response inhibition. Exp Brain Res 160: 60-70.
60. Jonkman LM, Sniedt FL, Kemner C, (2007) Source localization of the Nogo-N2: a developmental study. Clin Neurophysiol 118: 1069-1077.
61. Malloy P, Bihrle A, Duffy J, Cimino C, (1993) The orbitomedial frontal syndrome. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 8: 185-201.
62. Bonini L, Ferrari PF, (2011) Evolution of mirror systems: a simple mechanism for complex cognitive functions. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1225: 166-75.
63. Olivares EI, Iglesias J, (2008) Brain potentials and integration of external and internal features into face representations. Int J Psychophysiol 68: 59-69.
64. Bobes MA, Martin M, Olivares E, Valdes-Sosa M, (2000) Different scalp topography of brain potentials related to expression and identity matching of faces. Brain Res: Cogn Brain Res 9: 249-260.
65. Jemel B, Pisani M, Rousselle L, Crommelinck M, Bruyer R, (2005) Exploring the functional architecture of person recognition system with event-related potentials in a within- and cross-domain self-priming of faces. Neuropsychologia 43(14): 2024-2040.
66. Rossion B, Jacques C, (2008) Does physical interstimulus variance account for early electrophysiological face sensitive responses in the human brain? Ten lessons on the N170. Neuroimage 39: 1959-1979.
67. Pönkänen LM, Hietanen JK, Peltola MJ, Kauppinen PK, Haapalainen A, et al. (2008) Facing a real person: an event-related potential study. NeuroReport 19: 497-501.