The emergence of semantic meaning in the ventral temporal pathway

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 120-131

  Carlson, Thomas A ^a,b   Simmons, Ryan A ^b   Kriegeskorte, Nikolaus ^c   Robert Slevc, L ^b  

^a MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^c MRC COGNITION AND BRAIN SCIENCES UNIT   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BRAIN; COLOR; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM; GEOMETRY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; INFERIOR TEMPORAL CORTEX; KNOWLEDGE; LANGUAGE; LIGHT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETINA; SEMANTICS; VENTRAL VISUAL PATHWAY; VISUAL INFORMATION; VISUAL SYSTEM;

ADOLESCENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; SEMANTICS; TEMPORAL LOBE; VISUAL CORTEX; VISUAL PATHWAYS;

EID: 84888343138     PISSN: 0898929X     EISSN: 15308898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_00458     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Andrews, M., Vigliocco, G., & Vinson, D. (2009). Integrating experiential and distributional data to learn semantic representations. Psychological Review, 116, 463-498.
2. Banerjee, S., & Pedersen, T. (2002). An adapted Lesk algorithm for word sense disambiguation using WordNet. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Intelligent Text Processing and Computational Linguistics (CICLing-2002) (pp. 136-145), Mexico City, Mexico.
3. Banerjee, S., & Pedersen, T. (2003). Extended gloss overlaps as a measure of semantic relatedness. In Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 805-810), Acapulco, Mexico.
4. Basso, A., Capitani, E., & Laiacona, M. (1988). Progressive language impairment without dementia: A case with isolated category specific semantic defect. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 51, 1201-1207.
5. Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 993-1022.
6. Boyd-Graber, J., & Fellbaum, C. (2006). Adding dense, weighted connections to wordnet. In Proceedings of the 3rd Global WordNet Meeting (pp. 29-35), Jeju-do, Korea.
7. Brown, C. H. (2011). Hand and arm. In M. S. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (Eds.), The world atlas of language structures (vol. 100, pp. 522-525). Munich: Max Planck Digital Library. Retrieved from wals. info/chapter/129.
8. Budanitsky, A., & Hirst, G. (2005). Evaluating WordNet-based measures of lexical semantic relatedness. Computational Linguistics, 32, 13-47.
9. Capitani, E., Laiacona, M., Mahon, B., & Caramazza, A. (2003). What are the facts of semantic category-specific deficits? A critical review of the clinical evidence. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 213-261.
10. Caramazza, A., & Shelton, J. R. (1998). Domain-specific knowledge systems in the brain the animate-inanimate distinction. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 1-34.
11. Connolly, A. C., Guntupalli, J. S., Gors, J., Hanke, M., Halchenko, Y. O., Wu, Y.-C., et al. (2012). The representation of biological classes in the human brain. The Journal of Neuroscience, 32, 2608-2618.
12. Cree, G. S., & McRae, K. (2003). Analyzing the factors underlying the structure and computation of the meaning of chipmunk, cherry, chisel, cheese, and cello (and many other such concrete nouns). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 163-201.
13. Dahl, Ö. (2008). Animacy and egophoricity: Grammar, ontology and phylogeny. Lingua, 118, 141-150.
14. Dahl, Ö., & Fraurud, K. (1996). Animacy in grammar and discourse. In T. Fretheim & J. K. Gundel (Eds.), Reference and reference accessibility (pp. 47-64). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
15. Davis, M. H., & Johnsrude, I. S. (2003). Hierarchical processing in spoken language comprehension. The Journal of Neuroscience, 23, 3423-3431.
16. Downing, P. E., Jiang, Y., Shuman, M., & Kanwisher, N. (2001). A cortical area selective for visual processing of the human body. Science, 293, 2470-2473.
17. Fellbaum, C. (1998). WordNet: An electronic lexical database. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Ferrara, F., & Tasso, C. (2013). Evaluating the results of methods for computing semantic relatedness. Computational Linguistics and Intelligence Text Processing, 7816, 446-458.
19. Ferreira, F., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2007). Introduction to the special issue on language-vision interactions. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 455-459.
20. Finkelstein, L., Gabrilovich, E., Matias, Y., Rivlin, E., Solan, Z., Wolfman, G., et al. (2002). Placing search in context: The concept revisited. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 20, 116-131.
21. Gabrilovich, E., & Markovitch, S. (2007). Computing semantic relatedness using Wikipedia-based explicit semantic analysis. In Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI) (pp. 1606-1611).
22. Giraud, A. L. (2004). Contributions of sensory input, auditory search and verbal comprehension to cortical activity during speech processing. Cerebral Cortex, 14, 247-255.
23. Glenberg, A. M., & Mehta, S. (2008). Constraint on covariation: It's not meaning. Rivista di Linguistica, 20, 237-262.
24. Griffiths, T. L., Steyvers, M., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2007). Topics in semantic representation. Psychological Review, 114, 211-244.
25. Gross, C. G. (1992). Representation of visual stimuli in inferior temporal cortex. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, Biological Sciences, 335, 3-10.
26. Hallgren, K. A. (2012). Computing interrater reliability for observational data: An overview and tutorial. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 8, 23-34.
27. Hassan, S., Banea, C., & Mihalcea, R. (2012). Measuring semantic relatedness using multilingual representations. In First Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics (pp. 20-29), Montreal, Canada.
28. Hawker, T., & Honnibal, M. (2006). Improved default sense selection for word sense disambiguation. In Proceedings of the 2006 Australasian Language Technology Workshop (ALTW2006) (pp. 11-17), Sydney, Australia.
29. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61-83; discussion 83-135.
30. Huth, A. H., Nishimoto, S., Vu, A. T., & Gallant, J. L. (2012). A continuous semantic space describes the representation of thousands of object and action categories across the human brain. Neuron, 76, 1210-1224.
31. Jarmasz, M., & Szpakowicz, S. (2003). Roget's thesaurus and semantic similarity. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (RANLP 2003) (pp. 212-219), Borovets, Bulgaria.
32. Kanwisher, N., McDermott, J., & Chun, M. M. (1997). The fusiform face area: A module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception. The Journal of Neuroscience, 17, 4302-4311.
33. Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
34. Katz, P., & Goldsmith-Pinkham, P. (1998). Word sense disambiguation using latent semantic analysis. Retrieved from www.wsrn.sccs.swarthmore.edu/users/07/pkatz1/ cs65f06-final.pdf.
35. Kiani, R., & Esteky, H. (2007). Object category structure in response patterns of neuronal population in monkey inferior temporal cortex. Journal of Physiology, 4296-4309.
36. Kievit-Kylar, B., & Jones, M. N. (2012). Visualizing multiple word similarity measures. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 656-674.
37. Konkle, T., & Oliva, A. (2012). A real-world size organization of object responses in occipitotemporal cortex. Neuron, 74, 1114-1124.
38. Kriegeskorte, N., Mur, M., Ruff, D. A., Kiani, R., Bodurka, J., Esteky, H., et al. (2008). Matching categorical object representations in inferior temporal cortex of man and monkey. Neuron, 60, 1126-1141.
39. Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211-240.
40. Lapata, M., & Barzilay, R. (2005). Automatic evaluation of text coherence: Models and representations. In 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 1085-1090), Edinburgh. Retrieved from ijcai. org/ Past Proceedings/IJCAI-05/PDF/0505. pdf.
41. Levinson, S. C. (1996). Relativity in spatial conception and description. In J. J. Gumperz & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 177-202). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42. Logothetis, N., & Sheinberg, D. (1996). Visual object recognition. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 19, 577-621.
43. Mahon, B. Z., Anzellotti, S., Schwarzbach, J., Zampini, M., & Caramazza, A. (2009). Category-specific organization in the human brain does not require visual experience. Neuron, 63, 397-405.
44. Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2011). What drives the organization of object knowledge in the brain? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 97-103.
45. Majid, A. (2010). Words for parts of the body. In B. C. Malt & P. Wolff (Eds.), Words and the mind: How words capture human experience (pp. 58-71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46. Maki, W. S., & Buchanan, E. (2008). Latent structure in measures of associative, semantic, and thematic knowledge. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 598-603.
47. Mandler, J. M. (2004). Thought before language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 508-513.
48. Martin, A. (2007). The representation of object concepts in the brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 25-45.
49. McRae, K., Cree, G. S., Seidenberg, M. S., & McNorgan, C. (2005). Semantic feature production norms for a large set of living and nonliving things. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 547-559.
50. Michel, J.-B., Shen, Y. K., Aiden, A. P., Veres, A., Gray, M. K., Pickett, J. P., et al. (2011). Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of digitized books. Science, 331, 176-182.
51. Miller, G. A. (1995). WordNet: A lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM, 38, 39-41.
52. Miller, G. A., & Charles, W. G. (1991). Contextual correlates of semantic similarity. Language and Cognitive Processes, 6, 1-28.
53. Mitchell, T. M., Shinkareva, S. V., Carlson, A., Chang, K.-M., Malave, V. L., Mason, R. A., et al. (2008). Predicting human brain activity associated with the meanings of nouns. Science, 320, 1191-1195.
54. Mohammad, S., Gurevych, I., Hirst, G., & Zesch, T. (2007). Cross-lingual distributional profiles of concepts for measuring semantic distance. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning (EMNLP/CoNLL-2007), Prague, Czech Republic.
55. Mohammad, S., & Hirst, G. (2006). Distributional measures as proxies for semantic distance: A survey. Retrieved from www.umiacs.umd.edu/~saif/ WebDocs/ distributionalmeasures.pdf.
56. Moldovan, D., & Novischi, A. (2004). Word sense disambiguation of WordNet glosses. Computer Speech & Language, 18, 301-317.
57. Panchenko, A. (2012). A study of heterogeneous similarity measures for semantic relation extraction. In Proceedings of 14e Rencontres des Étudiants Chercheurs en Informatique pour le Traitement Automatique des Langue (JEP-TALN-RECITAL), 2012 (vol. 3, pp. 29-42), Grenoble, France.
58. Patwardhan, S., & Pedersen, T. (2006). Using WordNet-based context vectors to estimate the semantic relatedness of concepts. In Proceedings of the EACL 2006 Workshop: Making Sense of Sense-Bringing Computational Linguistics and Psycholinguistics Together (pp. 1-8), Trento, Italy. Retrieved from acl. ldc. upenn. edu/eacl2006/ ws09_makingsense. pdf#page=7.
59. Pedersen, T., Patwardhan, S., & Michelizzi, J. (2004). WordNet:: Similarity: Measuring the relatedness of concepts. In Proceedings of the 5th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL-04) (pp. 38-41), Boston, Massachusetts. Retrieved from dl. acm. org/citation. cfm?id=1614025.1614037.
60. Piaget, J. (1952). The origin of intelligence in the child. New York: International University Press.
61. Prinz, W. (1997). Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9, 129-154.
62. Reddy, L., & Kanwisher, N. (2006). Coding of visual objects in the ventral stream. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 16, 408-414.
63. Reich, L., Szwed, M., Cohen, L., & Amedi, A. (2011). A ventral visual stream reading center independent of visual experience. Current Biology: CB, 21, 363-368.
64. Riordan, B., & Jones, M. N. (2010). Redundancy in perceptual and linguistic experience: Comparing feature-based and distributional models of semantic representation. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3, 303-345.
65. Rodd, J. M., Davis, M. H., & Johnsrude, I. S. (2005). The neural mechanisms of speech comprehension: fMRI studies of semantic ambiguity. Cerebral Cortex, 15, 1261-1269.
66. Rohde, D. L. T., Gonnerman, L. M., & Plaut, D. C. (2005). An improved model of semantic similarity based on lexical co-occurrence. Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved from tedlab. mit. edu/~dr/Papers/ RohdeGonnermanPlaut-COALS. pdf.
67. Rubenstein, H., & Goodenough, J. B. (1965). Contextual correlates of synonymy. Communications of the ACM, 8, 627-633. Retrieved from dl. acm. org/citation. cfm?id=365657.
68. Silveri, M. C., & Gainottib, G. (1988). Interaction between vision and language in category-specific semantic impairment. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 5, 677-709.
69. Simanova, I., Hagoort, P., Oostenveld, R., & Van Gerven, M. A. J. (2012). Modality-independent decoding of semantic information from the human brain. Cerebral Cortex. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhs324.
70. Striem-Amit, E., Cohen, L., Dehaene, S., & Amedi, A. (2012). Reading with sounds: Sensory substitution selectively activates the visual word form area in the blind. Neuron, 76, 640-652.
71. Ungerleider, L. G., & Mishkin, M. (1982). Two cortical visual systems. In D. J. Ingle, M. A. Goodale, & R. J. W. Mansfield (Eds.), Analysis of visual behavior (pp. 549-586). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
72. Vossen, P. (1998). EuroWordNet: A multilingual database with lexical semantic networks. Psychoanalytic review (vol. 100). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. doi:10.1521/prev.2013.100.3.513.
73. Waltinger, U., & Mehler, A. (2009). Social semantics and its evaluation by means of semantic relatedness and open topic models. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/ WIC/ACM International Joint Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (pp. 42-49). IEEE. doi:10.1109/ WI-IAT.2009.14.