Grezes_Neuropsychologia_02.ent

  1. Citation
  2. Submitter
  3. Prose Description
  4. Subjects
  5. Conditions
  6. Sessions
  7. Analysis
  8. Experiments
  9. Results Synopsis

Citation

Paper ID: 7010006
Title: Does visual perception of object afford action? Evidence from a neuroimaging study
Authors: Grezes J, Decety J
Journal: Neuropsychologia
Volume: 40
Pages: 212-222
Date: Jan 2002
Medline Number: 11640943
Citation Keywords: perception, object, action, intention, PET, affordance
Laboratory: INSERM
City: Lyon
Country: France

Submitter

Submitter Name: Sarah Thelen
Submitter Type: Research Assistant
Email: thelens@uthscsa.edu
Phone: 210.567.8175
Address: The University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, Research Imaging Institute M/C 6240, 7703 Floyd Curl Drive, San Antonio, TX 78229-3900

Prose Description

Subjects underwent 5 conditions. Condition 1: Upright/Inverted: subjects viewed pictures of tools and indicated if they were presented upright or inverted. Condition 2: Motor Imagery: subjects viewed pictures of tools, imagined grasping and using each tool, and indicated if the tool was oriented on the left or right side. Condition 3: Silent Verb Generation: subjects viewed pictures of tools, silently named them, and indicated if the tool was oriented on the left or right side. Condition 4: Silent Noun Generation: subjects viewed pictures of tools, silently said the use for each tool, and indicated if the tool was oriented on the left or right side. Condition 5: Control: subjects viewed non-objects and indicated if the non-object was larger on the right or left side. Experiment 1: Perception of Objects, Irrespective of the Task. Experiment 2: Upright/Inverted vs. Control. Experiment 3: Motor Imagery vs. Control. Experiment 4: Silent Verb Generation vs. Control. Experiment 5: Silent Noun Generation vs. Control.

Subject Groups

Normals
Diagnosis: Normals
Total Subjects: 10
Gender: Males only
Handedness: Right
Minimum Age: 20
Maximum Age: 30
Mean Age: 24
Native Language: Unknown
External Assessments: Accuracy

Conditions

  1. Upright/Inverted
    Stimulus: Visual, Pictures, Color photographs of real graspable objects.
    Response: Hand, Button Press
    Instruction: Discriminate, Subjects determined whether the objects in the pictures were upright or inverted.
  2. Motor Imagery
    Stimulus: Visual, Pictures, Color photographs of real graspable objects.
    Response: Hand, Button Press
    Instruction: Imagine, Subjects imagined grasping and using each object presented.
    Instruction: Discriminate, Subjects determined the horizontal orientation of the object with regard to the object's grasp.
  3. Silent Verb Generation
    Stimulus: Visual, Pictures, Color photographs of real graspable objects.
    Response: Hand, Button Press
    Instruction: Generate, Subjects covertly generated the use for the object (verb).
    Instruction: Discriminate, Subjects made a keyboard response with the left or right hand depending on the horizontal orientation of the object.
  4. Silent Noun Generation
    Stimulus: Visual, Pictures, Color photographs of real graspable objects.
    Response: Hand, Button Press
    Instruction: Generate, Subjects covertly generated the name for the object (noun).
    Instruction: Discriminate, Subjects made a keyboard response with the left or right hand depending on the horizontal orientation of the object.
  5. Control
    Stimulus: Visual, Pictures, Photographs of non-objects were manipulated to make one side of the non-object appear larger than the other.
    Response: Hand, Button Press
    Instruction: Discriminate, Subjects discriminated whether the non-objects were larger on the right or on the left side and made a keyboard response.

Sessions

This was a single-session paper.

Analysis

Software Package(s): SPM96
Template Brain: Unknown
Transform: None
Reference Space: MNI

Experiments

  1. Perception of Objects, Irrespective of the Task
    Context: Normal Mapping
    Functional Imaging Modality: PET (Siemens CTI HR +)
    Subjects: Normals
    Conditions: Upright/Inverted, Motor Imagery, Silent Verb Generation, Silent Noun Generation, Control
    Contrast: Stimulus Type, Instruction
    Paradigm Class: Imagined Objects/Scenes, Naming (Covert), Visuospatial Attention, Word Generation (Covert)
    Behavioral Domain: Cognition.Language.Speech, Action.Imagination, Perception.Vision.Shape, Cognition.Language.Semantics

    Locations

    IDX (mm)Y (mm)Z (mm)SPI ValueSPI Unit
    16.0-6.072.04.35z
    2-52.0-44.030.04.07z
    3-6.0-48.024.04.09z
    418.0-18.022.04.25z
    5-40.028.08.03.98z
    6-58.0-2.06.04.32z
    7-50.0-68.04.04.87z
    848.0-62.0-48.04.30z

  2. Upright/Inverted vs. Control
    Context: Normal Mapping
    Functional Imaging Modality: PET (Siemens CTI HR +)
    Subject Groups: Normals
    Conditions: Upright/Inverted, Control
    Contrast: Stimulus Type, Instruction
    Paradigm Class: Visuospatial Attention
    Behavioral Domain: Perception.Vision.Shape

    Locations

    IDX (mm)Y (mm)Z (mm)SPI ValueSPI Unit
    112.022.024.04.16z
    242.044.024.03.56z
    346.0-66.016.03.75z
    458.024.0-4.03.35z
    548.0-28.0-6.03.55z
    628.0-2.0-8.03.41z
    750.0-4.0-20.03.83z

  3. Motor Imagery vs. Control
    Context: Normal Mapping
    Functional Imaging Modality: PET (Siemens CTI HR +)
    Subject Groups: Normals
    Conditions: Motor Imagery, Control
    Contrast: Stimulus Type, Instruction
    Paradigm Class: Imagined Objects/Scenes, Visuospatial Attention
    Behavioral Domain: Action.Imagination, Perception.Vision.Shape

    Locations

    IDX (mm)Y (mm)Z (mm)SPI ValueSPI Unit
    1-30.0-10.052.04.55z
    2-6.0-68.044.03.78z
    3-34.038.034.06.24z
    418.032.028.03.50z
    566.0-52.020.03.48z
    652.024.0-2.03.36z
    724.0-6.0-4.03.30z

  4. Silent Verb Generation vs. Control
    Context: Normal Mapping
    Functional Imaging Modality: PET (Siemens CTI HR +)
    Subject Groups: Normals
    Conditions: Silent Verb Generation, Control
    Contrast: Stimulus Type, Instruction
    Paradigm Class: Visuospatial Attention, Word Generation (Covert)
    Behavioral Domain: Cognition.Language.Semantics,
    Perception.Vision.Shape, Cognition.Language.Speech,

    Locations

    IDX (mm)Y (mm)Z (mm)SPI ValueSPI Unit
    1-56.0-8.044.03.93z
    2-48.0-62.032.04.49z
    3-32.040.032.04.00z
    4-46.016.06.04.92z
    5-62.0-42.00.04.58z
    6-36.0-30.0-18.04.73z

  5. Silent Noun Generation vs. Control
    Context: Normal Mapping
    Functional Imaging Modality: PET (Siemens CTI HR +)
    Subject Groups: Normals
    Conditions: Control, Silent Noun Generation
    Contrast: Stimulus Type, Instruction
    Paradigm Class: Naming (Covert), Visuospatial Attention
    Behavioral Domain: Cognition.Language.Semantics,
    Perception.Vision.Shape, Cognition.Language.Speech,

    Locations

    IDX (mm)Y (mm)Z (mm)SPI ValueSPI Unit
    1-56.0-6.044.03.59z
    2-32.038.034.03.88z
    3-48.016.010.05.09z
    4-56.0-30.02.03.98z
    5-36.0-30.0-16.04.35z

Results Synopsis

The main result of this study was that the perception of objects, irrespective of the task (judgement of the vertical orientation, motor imagery, and silent generation of the noun or of the corresponding action verb), versus perception of non-objects, was associated with rCBF increases in a common set of cortical regions. The occipito-temporal junction, the inferior parietal lobule, the SMA-proper, the pars triangularis in the inferior frontal gyrus, the dorsal and ventral precentral gyrus were engaged in the left hemisphere. The ipsilateral cerebellum was also involved. These activations are congruent with the idea of an involvement of motor representation already during the perception of object and thus provide neurophysiological evidence that the perception of objects automatically affords actions that can be made toward them. Besides this common set of cortical areas, each task engaged specific regions.

Copyright © 2003-2016 Research Imaging Institute. All rights reserved.