FMRI Reveals a Dissociation Between Object Grasping and Object Recognition Culham et al. (submitted)

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Neural systems for attention to threat in anxiety: an fMRI study Leor Shoker, Nazanin Derakshan, Anne Richards & Elaine Fox.

Advertisements

When zero is not zero: The problem of ambiguous baseline conditions in fMRI Stark & Squire (2001) By Mike Toulis November 12, 2002.

Chapter 4: The Visual Cortex and Beyond

Midterm 1 Oct. 21 in class. Read this article by Wednesday next week!

Blindsight Seeing without Awareness. What is Blindsight ‘Blindsight’ (Weiskrantz): residual visual function after V1 damage in the lack of any visual.

Chapter 44 Visual Perception of Objects Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Fast Readout of Object Identity from Macaque Inferior Tempora Cortex Chou P. Hung, Gabriel Kreiman, Tomaso Poggio, James J.DiCarlo McGovern Institute for.

A Neuronal Model of Human Choice Rome ESA June 30, 2007 Authors:John Dickhaut, Ovidiu Longu, Baohua Xin and Aldo Rustichini.

INTRODUCTION Assessing the size of objects rapidly and accurately clearly has survival value. Thus, a central multi-sensory module for magnitude assessment.

Introduction to Functional MRI Last Update: January 14, 2013 Last Course: Psychology 9223, W2013 Jody Culham Brain and Mind.

Qué PASA? The Posterior-Anterior Shift in Aging Simon W. Davis, Nancy A. Dennis, Sander M. Daselaar, Mathias S. Fleck, & Roberto Cabeza Cerebral Cortex,

Spatial Neglect and Attention Networks

Dissociable neural mechanisms supporting visual short-term memory for objects Xu, Y. & Chun, M. M. (2006) Nature, 440,

An fMRI investigation of covertly and overtly produced mono- and multisyllabic words. Shuster LI, Lemieux SK. Brain and Language 93 (2005):20-31.

A Module in Human Extrastriate Cortex Specialized for Face Perception

Stroop Performance in Normal Control Subjects: An fMRI Study S.A. Gruber, J. Rogowska, P. Holcomb, S. Soraci, and D. Yurgelun-Todd.

16.899A: Physiology (contd) Lavanya Sharan January 24 th, 2011.

You have a test next week!

Searching for the NCC We can measure all sorts of neural correlates of these processes…so we can see the neural correlates of consciousness right? So what’s.

Read Lamme (2000) TINS article for Wednesday. Visual Pathways V1 is, of course, not the only visual area (it turns out it’s not even always “primary”)

Attention Orienting System and Associated Disorders Neglect, Extinction and Balint’s Syndrome.

Post-test review session Tuesday Nov in TH241.

FMRI - What Is It? Then: Example of fMRI in Face Processing Psychology 355: Cognitive Psychology Instructor: John Miyamoto 04/06 /2015: Lecture 02-1 This.

The visual pathways. Ventral pathway receptive field properties 0 1 TE receptive field V4 receptive field V1 receptive field.

Basic Processes in Visual Perception

Motor cortical areas: the homunculus The motor system.

Categorization: Scenes & Objects (P) Lavanya Sharan March 16th, 2011.

Efficiency – practical Get better fMRI results Dummy-in-chief Joel Winston Design matrix and.

Sebastián-Gallés, N. & Bosch, L. (2009) Developmental shift in the discrimination of vowel contrasts in bilingual infants: is the distributional account.

Attention Modulates Responses in the Human Lateral Geniculate Nucleus Nature Neuroscience, 2002, 5(11): Presented by Juan Mo.

Saur et al. (2008) PNAS Ventral and dorsal pathways for language (14 authors!) Hickok & Poeppel’s (2004, 2008) Model –Dual-streams for auditory language.

RESULTS The masking paradigm worked well (participants reported that they knew there was something in the prime position, but where unable to identify.

Study 1: 23 Ss viewed 265 pictures of food, attractive faces, symbols indicating monetary gains, and neutral objects. Stimuli were rated on 14 dimensions.

Neural coding (1) LECTURE 8. I.Introduction − Topographic Maps in Cortex − Synesthesia − Firing rates and tuning curves.

Studying Memory Encoding with fMRI Event-related vs. Blocked Designs Aneta Kielar.

Cognitive Challenge Summary Analysis of Phase II data –240 sessions analyzed using BPutil pipeline, BIRN QA and Eventstats –ROI analysis of MFG, IPL, and.

Visual Perception, Attention & Action. Anthony J Greene2.

Chapter 8: Perceiving Motion

Vision. 2 Brodmann Original Calcarine 17 Collateral Sulcus Fusiform Gyrus 18.

Results Introduction Nonconditional Feedback Selectively Eliminates Conflict Adaption Summary Methods 38 participants performed a parity judgment task.

Multimodal Neuroimaging Training Program

Dorsal-stream motion processing deficits persist into adulthood in Williams syndrome Atkinson et al. (2006) Neuropsychologia, 44,

The role of the posterior prefrontal cortex in task preparation

INTRODUCTION ADULT AGE DIFFERENCES IN THE HEMODYNAMIC RESPONSE DURING VISUAL TARGET DETECTION MEASURED BY FUNCTIONAL MRI David J. Madden 1, Scott A. Huettel.

When the brain is prepared to learn: Enhancing human learning using real- time fMRI Y, J. J. a, Hinds, O. b, Ofen, N. a, Thompson, T. W. b, Whitﬁeld-Gabrieli,

Orienting Attention to Semantic Categories T Cristescu, JT Devlin, AC Nobre Dept. Experimental Psychology and FMRIB Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford,

FMRI and Behavioral Studies of Human Face Perception Ronnie Bryan Vision Lab

Ahissar, Hochstein (1997) Nature Task difficulty and specificity of perceptual learning 1 st third 2nd third Final session Task difficulty Stimulus-to-mask.

Kimron Shapiro & Frances Garrad-Cole The University of Wales, Bangor

Volume 60, Issue 4, Pages (November 2008)

The Visual System: Higher Cortical Mechanisms

Lior Shmuelof, Ehud Zohary Neuron

The Cortical Motor System

Rachel Ludmer, Yadin Dudai, Nava Rubin Neuron

Michael S Beauchamp, Kathryn E Lee, Brenna D Argall, Alex Martin

Volume 41, Issue 5, Pages (March 2004)

Volume 43, Issue 5, Pages (September 2004)

Volume 35, Issue 4, Pages (August 2002)

The Generality of Parietal Involvement in Visual Attention

Volume 26, Issue 7, Pages (April 2016)

Michael S Beauchamp, Kathryn E Lee, Brenna D Argall, Alex Martin

Distributed Neural Systems for the Generation of Visual Images

Lior Shmuelof, Ehud Zohary Neuron

Michael S. Beauchamp, Kathryn E. Lee, James V. Haxby, Alex Martin

fMRI of Monkey Visual Cortex

Optic Ataxia: From Balint’s Syndrome to the Parietal Reach Region

Integration of Local Features into Global Shapes

Michael S. Beauchamp, Kathryn E. Lee, James V. Haxby, Alex Martin

Volume 47, Issue 6, Pages (September 2005)

Human Posterior Parietal Cortex Flexibly Determines Reference Frames for Reaching Based on Sensory Context Pierre-Michel Bernier, Scott T. Grafton Neuron

Presentation transcript:

fMRI Reveals a Dissociation Between Object Grasping and Object Recognition Culham et al. (submitted)

Overview Background Methods Results Conclusions Discussion –Contrasts & baselines

Background Visual systems

Dual Stream Theory “ACTION” (grasping) “PERCEPTION” (1-back recognition)

fMRI Studies LO = lateral occipital complex –Recognition area in ventral stream AIP = anterior intraparietal complex –Grasping area in dorsal stream

Methods Participants –N=7, age 23-33, R-handed, fMRI experienced Design –1 scan session of grasping task –1 scan session of recognition task

Grasping Task

Grasparatus

Recognition Task Intact Objects –Grayscale –Line Drawings –Familiar and Novel Scrambled

Event-Related fMRI Removed motion-related artifact Blocked response types –Grasp, Reach, (No response) ITI = 14 s

Imaging & Analyses 4-Tesla system, head coil 13 T*-2 slices every 2 s –Parallel to calcarine sulcus T1 structural images Cortical surface-based analysis

Results 1)Functionally define ROIs 2)Reverse comparisons

AIP in Grasping (fig2a)

AIP Grasping: Time Course (fig4a - Left IPS time course)

AIP Grasping: Representative Individual (fig3b)

LO in Object Recognition (fig2b)

LO Recognition (fig4d – Left time course) Intact Scrambled

LO Recognition: Object Type (fig5a)

Cross Comparisons 1) AIP in Recognition 2)LO in Grasping

AIP in Recognition (fig4b – Right IPS data) Intact Scrambled

AIP Recognition: Object Type (fig5b)

Recognition: LO vs AIP (fig3c)

Grasp & Reach vs ITI (fig3a)

LO: Grasping = Reaching (fig4c – Left data) Grasping Reaching

Comparison Map (fig3d)

Discussion Is AIP activated by Intact-Scrambled? Is LO activated by Grasping-Reaching? Results support hypotheses How much do they specify the processes unique to AIP and LO?

AIP: Contrasts in Grasping Task Grasp -Reach –G requires info to preshape hand –More goal directed(?) G&R – dark ITI –Both above baseline –Why this baseline? What happened to the ‘no response’ condition (Blue LED)?

LO: Contrasts in 1-Back Task Intact-Scrambled –ID and meaning –Recognition – a misnomer? Novel > Familiar; Adaptation of LO I&S – fixation on dot –Only I greater –Alternative baselines – role of 1-back? Scrambled-Intact –Rationale? Interpretation?

Task Comparisons “AIP is activated more strongly by grasping, when object information is required to preshape the hand, but does not respond to images of objects in the absence of action” “LO is activated more strongly by objects than scrambled control images, but shows no enhanced activity when real objects are the targets for grasping compared to reaching”

“Real” vs Images Potential for grasping a requirement of AIP? Different stimulus types complicate direct comparisons Recognition of ‘real’ rectangles –LO adaptation Grasping of complex objects (e.g., tools) –AIP in viewing of graspable objects

AIP: Scrambled-Intact Attentional and spatial demands – S>I? –I>S? (Kourtzi & Kanwisher, 2000) Is G-R accounted for by attentional demands? –Overlap of G-R and S-C?

Conclusions Was the study objective addressed? Did results support hypotheses? How conclusive are the findings? How/why might additional and/or alternative contrast analyses be valuable?