Limits...
Dissociating the semantic function of two neighbouring subregions in the left lateral anterior temporal lobe.

Sanjuán A, Hope TM, Jones 'P, Prejawa S, Oberhuber M, Guerin J, Seghier ML, Green DW, Price CJ - Neuropsychologia (2014)

Bottom Line: During semantic association matching on picture stimuli or heard object names, we found that activation in both subregions was higher when the objects were semantically related (mug-kettle) than unrelated (car-teapot).This is consistent with both LATL subregions playing a role in (C), the successful retrieval of amodal semantic concepts.We discuss the implications of these novel findings for cognitive models of semantic processing and left anterior temporal lobe function.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, University College London, London WC1N 3BG, United Kingdom; Neuropsychology and Functional Imaging Group, Departamento de Psicología Básica, Clínica y Psicobiología, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón, Spain. Electronic address: anatsanjuan@gmail.com.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Illustration of stimuli used in the semantic matching and naming tasks. Top row: Examples of semantically related and semantically unrelated stimuli used for semantic matching decisions on pictures of 2 objects. Middle row: In the auditory conditions, object names were spoken in a male voice. Words in a pair were always linked with “and”. Bottom row: In the object naming condition, the participant named two objects that were semantically unrelated. In the sentence and verb naming conditions, participants saw pictures of events and either produced the whole sentence (“The goat is eating the hat”) or the verb (“Eating”). Note that the figure shows the same set of four objects (grapes, pear, hat, and goat) in all conditions. However, in the fMRI experiment, participants never saw more than one repetition of the same object, see methods and appendix for further details.
© Copyright Policy - CC BY
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4582806&req=5

f0015: Illustration of stimuli used in the semantic matching and naming tasks. Top row: Examples of semantically related and semantically unrelated stimuli used for semantic matching decisions on pictures of 2 objects. Middle row: In the auditory conditions, object names were spoken in a male voice. Words in a pair were always linked with “and”. Bottom row: In the object naming condition, the participant named two objects that were semantically unrelated. In the sentence and verb naming conditions, participants saw pictures of events and either produced the whole sentence (“The goat is eating the hat”) or the verb (“Eating”). Note that the figure shows the same set of four objects (grapes, pear, hat, and goat) in all conditions. However, in the fMRI experiment, participants never saw more than one repetition of the same object, see methods and appendix for further details.

Mentions: From these 60 event pictures, we generated 120 pictures of individual objects. The stimuli were then paired in novel combinations (i.e. not the same as those used in the events). For example, the stimulus “cup” was presented with “king” in an event picture (“The king is drinking from the cup”) but paired with “teapot” during semantically related matching trials (“cup” and “teapot”) and “piano” during object naming (“cup” and “piano”). Examples of the picture stimuli can be seen in Fig. 3. The stimuli used for the auditory semantic decisions were spoken object names, linked with “and” (e.g. “tiger and bowl”) with a mean duration of 1.92 s and standard deviation of 0.13 s from the onset of the first word to the offset of the second word.


Dissociating the semantic function of two neighbouring subregions in the left lateral anterior temporal lobe.

Sanjuán A, Hope TM, Jones 'P, Prejawa S, Oberhuber M, Guerin J, Seghier ML, Green DW, Price CJ - Neuropsychologia (2014)

Illustration of stimuli used in the semantic matching and naming tasks. Top row: Examples of semantically related and semantically unrelated stimuli used for semantic matching decisions on pictures of 2 objects. Middle row: In the auditory conditions, object names were spoken in a male voice. Words in a pair were always linked with “and”. Bottom row: In the object naming condition, the participant named two objects that were semantically unrelated. In the sentence and verb naming conditions, participants saw pictures of events and either produced the whole sentence (“The goat is eating the hat”) or the verb (“Eating”). Note that the figure shows the same set of four objects (grapes, pear, hat, and goat) in all conditions. However, in the fMRI experiment, participants never saw more than one repetition of the same object, see methods and appendix for further details.
© Copyright Policy - CC BY
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4582806&req=5

f0015: Illustration of stimuli used in the semantic matching and naming tasks. Top row: Examples of semantically related and semantically unrelated stimuli used for semantic matching decisions on pictures of 2 objects. Middle row: In the auditory conditions, object names were spoken in a male voice. Words in a pair were always linked with “and”. Bottom row: In the object naming condition, the participant named two objects that were semantically unrelated. In the sentence and verb naming conditions, participants saw pictures of events and either produced the whole sentence (“The goat is eating the hat”) or the verb (“Eating”). Note that the figure shows the same set of four objects (grapes, pear, hat, and goat) in all conditions. However, in the fMRI experiment, participants never saw more than one repetition of the same object, see methods and appendix for further details.
Mentions: From these 60 event pictures, we generated 120 pictures of individual objects. The stimuli were then paired in novel combinations (i.e. not the same as those used in the events). For example, the stimulus “cup” was presented with “king” in an event picture (“The king is drinking from the cup”) but paired with “teapot” during semantically related matching trials (“cup” and “teapot”) and “piano” during object naming (“cup” and “piano”). Examples of the picture stimuli can be seen in Fig. 3. The stimuli used for the auditory semantic decisions were spoken object names, linked with “and” (e.g. “tiger and bowl”) with a mean duration of 1.92 s and standard deviation of 0.13 s from the onset of the first word to the offset of the second word.

Bottom Line: During semantic association matching on picture stimuli or heard object names, we found that activation in both subregions was higher when the objects were semantically related (mug-kettle) than unrelated (car-teapot).This is consistent with both LATL subregions playing a role in (C), the successful retrieval of amodal semantic concepts.We discuss the implications of these novel findings for cognitive models of semantic processing and left anterior temporal lobe function.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, University College London, London WC1N 3BG, United Kingdom; Neuropsychology and Functional Imaging Group, Departamento de Psicología Básica, Clínica y Psicobiología, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón, Spain. Electronic address: anatsanjuan@gmail.com.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus