The Neural Representations of Movement across Semantic Categories.

Previous evidence from neuropsychological and neuroimaging studies suggests functional specialization for tools and related semantic knowledge in a left frontoparietal network. It is still debated whether these areas are involved in the representation of rudimentary movement-relevant knowledge regardless of semantic domains (animate vs. inanimate) or categories (tools vs. nontool objects). Here, we used fMRI to record brain activity while 13 volunteers performed two semantic judgment tasks on visually presented items from three different categories: animals, tools, and nontool objects. Participants had to judge two distinct semantic features: whether two items typically move in a similar way (e.g., a fan and a windmill move in circular motion) or whether they are usually found in the same environment (e.g., a seesaw and a swing are found in a playground). We investigated differences in overall activation (which areas are involved) as well as representational content (which information is encoded) across semantic features and categories. Results of voxel-wise mass univariate analysis showed that, regardless of semantic category, a dissociation emerges between processing information on prototypical location (involving the anterior temporal cortex and the angular gyrus) and movement (linked to left inferior parietal and frontal activation). Multivoxel pattern correlation analyses confirmed the representational segregation of networks encoding task- and category-related aspects of semantic processing. Taken together, these findings suggest that the left frontoparietal network is recruited to process movement properties of items (including both biological and nonbiological motion) regardless of their semantic category.

Distinct neural substrates for semantic knowledge and naming in the temporoparietal network.

Patients with anterior temporal lobe (ATL) lesions show semantic and lexical retrieval deficits, and the differential role of this area in the 2 processes is debated. Functional neuroimaging in healthy individuals has not clarified the matter because semantic and lexical processes usually occur simultaneously and automatically. Furthermore, the ATL is a region challenging for functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) due to susceptibility artifacts, especially at high fields. In this study, we established an optimized ATL-sensitive fMRI acquisition protocol at 4 T and applied an event-related paradigm to study the identification (i.e., association of semantic biographical information) of celebrities, with and without the ability to retrieve their proper names. While semantic processing reliably activated the ATL, only more posterior areas in the left temporal and temporal-parietal junction were significantly modulated by covert lexical retrieval. These results suggest that within a temporoparietal network, the ATL is relatively more important for semantic processing, and posterior language regions are relatively more important for lexical retrieval.

The influence of scene context on object recognition is independent of attentional focus.

Humans can quickly and accurately recognize objects within briefly presented natural scenes. Previous work has provided evidence that scene context contributes to this process, demonstrating improved naming of objects that were presented in semantically consistent scenes (e.g., a sandcastle on a beach) relative to semantically inconsistent scenes (e.g., a sandcastle on a football field). The current study was aimed at investigating which processes underlie the scene consistency effect. Specifically, we tested: (1) whether the effect is due to increased visual feature and/or shape overlap for consistent relative to inconsistent scene-object pairs; and (2) whether the effect is mediated by attention to the background scene. Experiment 1 replicated the scene consistency effect of a previous report (Davenport and Potter, 2004). Using a new, carefully controlled stimulus set, Experiment 2 showed that the scene consistency effect could not be explained by low-level feature or shape overlap between scenes and target objects. Experiments 3a and 3b investigated whether focused attention modulates the scene consistency effect. By using a location cueing manipulation, participants were correctly informed about the location of the target object on a proportion of trials, allowing focused attention to be deployed toward the target object. Importantly, the effect of scene consistency on target object recognition was independent of spatial attention, and was observed both when attention was focused on the target object and when attention was focused on the background scene. These results indicate that a semantically consistent scene context benefits object recognition independently of the focus of attention. We suggest that the scene consistency effect is primarily driven by global scene properties, or "scene gist", that can be processed with minimal attentional resources.