Physical experience leads to enhanced object perception in parietal cortex: Insights from knot tying

Neuropsychologia

Volumn 50, Issue 14, 2012, Pages 3207-3217

  Cross, Emily S ^a,b   Cohen, Nichola Rice ^c   Hamilton, Antonia F de C ^d   Ramsey, Richard ^a   Wolford, George ^e   Grafton, Scott T ^f  

^a BANGOR UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^e Dartmouth College   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Action learning; Neuroimaging; Object representation; Parietal; Perception

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN REGION; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTRAPARIETAL SULCUS; MALE; MENTAL TASK; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; NERVE CELL NETWORK; NEUROIMAGING; NORMAL HUMAN; OBJECT MANIPULATION; PARIETAL CORTEX; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERSONAL EXPERIENCE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL DISCRIMINATION; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BRAIN MAPPING; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LINGUISTICS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MOTOR SKILLS; NAMES; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; OXYGEN; PARIETAL LOBE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; TIME FACTORS; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84868312908     PISSN: 00283932     EISSN: 18733514     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.09.028     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Allport D.A. Distributed memory, modular subsystems and dysphasia. Current perspectives in dysphasia 1985, 207-244. Churchill Livingston, New York. S. Newman, R. Epstein (Eds.).
2. Anzellotti S., Mahon B.Z., Schwarzbach J., Caramazza A. Differential activity for animals and manipulable objects in the anterior temporal lobes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2011, 23:2059-2067.
3. Barsalou L.W. Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral Brain Sciences 1999, 22:577-609. discussion 610-560.
4. Barsalou L.W. Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology 2008, 59:617-645.
5. Barsalou L.W., Kyle Simmons W., Barbey A.K., Wilson C.D. Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems. Trends in Cognitive Science 2003, 7:84-91.
6. Bellebaum C., Tettamanti M., Marchetta E., Della Rosa P., Rizzo G., Daum I., et al. Neural representations of unfamiliar objects are modulated by sensorimotor experience. Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior 2012.
7. Binkofski F., Buccino G., Stephan K.M., Rizzolatti G., Seitz R.J., Freund H.J. A parieto-premotor network for object manipulation: evidence from neuroimaging. Experimental Brain Research 1999, 128:210-213.
8. Boronat C.B., Buxbaum L.J., Coslett H.B., Tang K., Saffran E.M., Kimberg D.Y., et al. Distinctions between manipulation and function knowledge of objects: evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging. Brain Research: Cognitive Brain Research 2005, 23:361-373.
9. Buxbaum L.J. Ideomotor apraxia: a call to action. Neurocase 2001, 7:445-458.
10. Buxbaum L.J., Saffran E.M. Knowledge of object manipulation and object function: dissociations in apraxic and nonapraxic subjects. Brain and Language 2002, 82:179-199.
11. Canessa N., Borgo F., Cappa S.F., Perani D., Falini A., Buccino G., et al. The different neural correlates of action and functional knowledge in semantic memory: an FMRI study. Cerebral Cortex 2008, 18:740-751.
12. Caramazza A., Mahon B.Z. The organization of conceptual knowledge: the evidence from category-specific semantic deficits. Trends in Cognitive Science 2003, 7:354-361.
13. Caramazza A., Shelton J.R. Domain-specific knowledge systems in the brain the animate-inanimate distinction. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1998, 10:1-34.
14. Chao L.L., Martin A. Representation of manipulable man-made objects in the dorsal stream. Neuroimage 2000, 12:478-484.
15. Cornelissen K., Laine M., Renvall K., Saarinen T., Martin N., Salmelin R. Learning new names for new objects: cortical effects as measured by magnetoencephalography. Brain and Language 2004, 89:617-622.
16. Creem-Regehr S.H., Dilda V., Vicchrilli A.E., Federer F., Lee J.N. The influence of complex action knowledge on representations of novel graspable objects: evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society: JINS 2007, 13:1009-1020.
17. Creem-Regehr S.H., Lee J.N. Neural representations of graspable objects: are tools special?. Brain Research: Cognitive Brain Research 2005, 22(3):457-469.
18. Cross E.S., Kraemer D.J., Hamilton A.F., Kelley W.M., Grafton S.T. Sensitivity of the action observation network to physical and observational learning. Cerebral Cortex 2009, 19:315-326.
19. Culham J.C., Valyear K.F. Human parietal cortex in action. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2006, 16:205-212.
20. De Renzi E., Faglioni P., Sorgato P. Modality-specific and supramodal mechanisms of apraxia. Brain: A Journal of Neurology 1982, 105:301-312.
21. Diedrichsen J., Shadmehr R. Detecting and adjusting for artifacts in fMRI time series data. Neuroimage 2005, 27:624-634.
22. Duarte A., Ranganath C., Winward L., Hayward D., Knight R.T. Dissociable neural correlates for familiarity and recollection during the encoding and retrieval of pictures. Brain Research: Cognitive Brain Research 2004, 18:255-272.
23. Eickhoff S.B., Stephan K.E., Mohlberg H., Grefkes C., Fink G.R., Amunts K., et al. A new SPM toolbox for combining probabilistic cytoarchitectonic maps and functional imaging data. NeuroImage 2005, 25:1325-1335.
24. Eickhoff S.B., Schliecher A., Zilles K., Amunts K. The human parietal operculum. I. Cytoarchitectonic mapping of subdivisions. Cerebral Cortex 2006, 16:254-267.
25. Ferstl E.C., Neumann J., Bogler C., Yves von Cramon D. The extended language network: a meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies on text comprehension. Human Brain Mapping 2007, 29(5):581-593.
26. Fodor J.A. Concepts: where cognitive science went wrong 1998, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
27. Frey S.H. What puts the how in where? Tool use and the divided visual streams hypothesis. Cortex 2007, 43:368-375.
28. Friston K.J., Price C.J., Fletcher P., Moore C., Frackowiak R.S., Dolan R.J. The trouble with cognitive subtraction. Neuroimage 1996, 4:97-104.
29. Gardner E.P., Babu K.S., Ghosh S., Sherwood A., Chen J. Neurophysiology of prehension. III. Representation of object features in posterior parietal cortex of the macaque monkey. Journal of Neurophysiology 2007, 98:3708-3730.
30. Gardner E.P., Babu K.S., Reitzen S.D., Ghosh S., Brown A.S., Chen J., et al. Neurophysiology of prehension. I. Posterior parietal cortex and object-oriented hand behaviors. Journal of Neurophysiology 2007, 97:387-406.
31. Gardner E.P., Ro J.Y., Babu K.S., Ghosh S. Neurophysiology of prehension. II. Response diversity in primary somatosensory (S-I) and motor (M-I) cortices. Journal of Neurophysiology 2007, 97:1656-1670.
32. Gibson J.J. The ecological approach to visual perception 1979, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, Hillsdale.
33. Grafton S.T. Embodied cognition and the simulation of action to understand others. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2009, 1156:97-117.
34. Grafton S.T., Fadiga L., Arbib M.A., Rizzolatti G. Premotor cortex activation during observation and naming of familiar tools. Neuroimage 1997, 6:231-236.
35. Grezes J., Decety J. Does visual perception of object afford action? Evidence from a neuroimaging study. Neuropsychologia 2002, 40:212-222.
36. Grol M.J., Majdandzic J., Stephan K.E., Verhagen L., Dijkerman H.C., Bekkering H., et al. Parieto-frontal connectivity during visually guided grasping. Journal of Neuroscience 2007, 27:11877-11887.
37. Gronholm P., Rinne J.O., Vorobyev V., Laine M. Naming of newly learned objects: a PET activation study. Brain Research: Cognitive Brain Research 2005, 25:359-371.
38. Hulten A., Vihla M., Laine M., Salmelin R. Accessing newly learned names and meanings in the native language. Human Brain Mapping 2009, 30:976-989.
39. James K.H., Swain S.N. Only self-generated actions create sensori-motor systems in the developing brain. Developmental Science 2011, 14:673-678.
40. James T.W., Gauthier I. Auditory and action semantic features activate sensory-specific perceptual brain regions. Current Biology 2003, 13:1792-1796.
41. James T.W., Gauthier I. Brain areas engaged during visual judgments by involuntary access to novel semantic information. Vision Research 2004, 44:429-439.
42. Jeannerod M. The representing brain: neural correlates of motor intention and imagery. Behavioural Brain Sciences 1994, 17:187-245.
43. Jeannerod M., Arbib M.A., Rizzolatti G., Sakata H. Grasping objects: the cortical mechanisms of visuomotor transformation. Trends in Neuroscience 1995, 18:314-320.
44. Johnson S.H. Imagining the impossible: intact motor representations in hemiplegics. Neuroreport 2000, 11:729-732.
45. Johnson S.H., Sprehn G., Saykin A.J. Intact motor imagery in chronic upper limb hemiplegics: evidence for activity-independent action representations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2002, 14:841-852.
46. Johnson-Frey S.H. The neural bases of complex tool use in humans. Trends in Cognitive Science 2004, 8:71-78.
47. Johnson-Frey S.H., Newman-Norlund R., Grafton S.T. A distributed left hemisphere network active during planning of everyday tool use skills. Cerebral Cortex 2005, 15:681-695.
48. Kellenbach M.L., Brett M., Patterson K. Actions speak louder than functions: the importance of manipulability and action in tool representation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2003, 15:30-46.
49. Kiefer M., Sim E.J., Liebich S., Hauk O., Tanaka J. Experience-dependent plasticity of conceptual representations in human sensory-motor areas. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2007, 19:525-542.
50. Liljestrom M., Hulten A., Parkkonen L., Salmelin R. Comparing MEG and fMRI views to naming actions and objects. Human Brain Mapping 2009, 30:1845-1856.
51. Mahon B.Z., Caramazza A. Concepts and categories: a cognitive neuropsychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology 2009, 60:27-51.
52. Mahon B.Z., Caramazza A. What drives the organization of object knowledge in the brain?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2011, 15:97-103.
53. Mahon B.Z., Milleville S.C., Negri G.A., Rumiati R.I., Caramazza A., Martin A. Action-related properties shape object representations in the ventral stream. Neuron 2007, 55:507-520.
54. Mangels J.A., Manzi A., Summerfield C. The first does the work, but the third time's the charm: the effects of massed repetition on episodic encoding of multimodal face-name associations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2010, 22:457-473.
55. Martin A. The organization of semantic knowledge and the orign of words in the brain. The origins and diversification of language 1998, 69-98. California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco. N. Jablonski, L. Aiello (Eds.).
56. Martin A. The representation of object concepts in the brain. Annual Review of Psychology 2007, 58:25-45.
57. Martin A., Haxby J.V., Lalonde F.M., Wiggs C.L., Ungerleider L.G. Discrete cortical regions associated with knowledge of color and knowledge of action. Science 1995, 270:102-105.
58. Martin A., Wiggs C.L., Ungerleider L.G., Haxby J.V. Neural correlates of category-specific knowledge. Nature 1996, 379:649-652.
59. Mechelli A., Sartori G., Orlandi P., Price C.J. Semantic relevance explains category effects in medial fusiform gyri. Neuroimage 2006, 30:992-1002.
60. Oldfield R.C. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 1971, 9:97-113.
61. Peissig J.J., Singer J., Kawasaki K., Sheinberg D.L. Effects of long-term object familiarity on event-related potentials in the monkey. Cerebral Cortex 2007, 17:1323-1334.
62. Price C.J., Devlin J.T., Moore C.J., Morton C., Laird A.R. Meta-analyses of object naming: effect of baseline. Human Brain Mapping 2005, 25:70-82.
63. Pulvermuller F. Brain mechanisms linking language and action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2005, 6:576-582.
64. Romaya, J. (2000). Cogent 2000 and cogent graphics software. In http://www.vislab.ucl.ac.uk/Cogent/.
65. Rothi L.J.G.H., Heilman K.M. Apraxia: the neuropsychology of action 1997, Hove: Psychology Press.
66. Sakata H., Tsutsui K., Taira M. Toward an understanding of the neural processing for 3D shape perception. Neuropsychologia 2005, 43:151-161.
67. Shapiro K.A., Pascual-Leone A., Mottaghy F.M., Gangitano M., Caramazza A. Grammatical distinctions in the left frontal cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2001, 13:713-720.
68. Talairach, J., & Tournoux, P. (1988). Co-planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain. New York: Thieme.
69. Tunik E., Rice N.J., Hamilton A., Grafton S.T. Beyond grasping: representation of action in human anterior intraparietal sulcus. Neuroimage 2007, 36(2):T77-T86.
70. Tyler L.K., Russell R., Fadili J., Moss H.E. The neural representation of nouns and verbs: PET studies. Brain: A Journal of Neurology 2001, 124:1619-1634.
71. Uncapher M.R., Otten L.J., Rugg M.D. Episodic encoding is more than the sum of its parts: an fMRI investigation of multifeatural contextual encoding. Neuron 2006, 52:547-556.
72. Ungerleider L.G., Mishkin M. Two cortical visual systems. Analysis of visual behavior 1982, 549-586. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. M.A.G.R.J.W.M.D.I. Ingle (Ed.).
73. Valyear K.F., Cavina-Patresi C., Stiglick A.J., Culham J.C. Does tool-related fMRI activity within the intraparietal sulcus reflect the plan to grasp?. Neuroimage 2007, 36(2):T94-T108.
74. Van Petten C., Senkfor A.J. Memory for words and novel visual patterns: repetition, recognition, and encoding effects in the event-related brain potential. Psychophysiology 1996, 33:491-506.
75. Van Petten C., Senkfor A.J., Newberg W.M. Memory for drawings in locations: spatial source memory and event-related potentials. Psychophysiology 2000, 37:551-564.
76. Weisberg J., van Turennout M., Martin A. A neural system for learning about object function. Cerebral Cortex 2007, 17:513-521.