Processing Objects at Different Levels of Specificity

How objects are represented and processed in the brain is a central topic in cognitive neuroscience. Previous studies have shown that knowledge of objects is represented in a featurebased distributed neural system primarily involving occipital and temporal cortical regions. Research with nonhuman primates suggest that these features are structured in a hierarchical system with posterior neurons in the inferior temporal cortex representing simple features and anterior neurons in the perirhinal cortex representing complex conjunctions of features (Bussey & Saksida, 2002; Murray & Bussey, 1999). On this account, the perirhinal cortex plays a crucial role in object identification by integrating information from different sensory systems into more complex polymodal feature conjunctions. We tested the implications of these claims for human object processing in an event-related fMRI study in which we presented colored pictures of common objects for 19 subjects to name at two levels of specificity-basic and domain. We reasoned that domain-level naming requires access to a coarsergrained representation of objects, thus involving only posterior regions of the inferior temporal cortex. In contrast, basic-level naming requires finer-grained discrimination to differentiate between similar objects, and thus should involve anterior temporal regions, including the perirhinal cortex. We found that object processing always activated the fusiform gyrus bilaterally, irrespective of the task, whereas the perirhinal cortex was only activated when the task required finer-grained discriminations. These results suggest that the same kind of hierarchical structure, which has been proposed for object processing in the monkey temporal cortex, functions in the human.

[1]  Morris Swadesh,et al.  The origin and diversification of language , 1971 .

[2]  E. Warrington Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology the Selective Impairment of Semantic Memory the Selective Impairment of Semantic Memory , 2022 .

[3]  T. Shallice,et al.  Category specific semantic impairments. , 1998, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[4]  J. Talairach,et al.  Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain: 3-Dimensional Proportional System: An Approach to Cerebral Imaging , 1988 .

[5]  Antonio R. Damasio,et al.  The Brain Binds Entities and Events by Multiregional Activation from Convergence Zones , 1989, Neural Computation.

[6]  Stephanie Clarke,et al.  Callosal Connections and Functional Subdivision of the Human Occipital Cortex , 1993 .

[7]  M. Mishkin,et al.  Effects on visual recognition of combined and separate ablations of the entorhinal and perirhinal cortex in rhesus monkeys , 1993, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[8]  Alan A. Wilson,et al.  Neuroanatomical correlates of encoding in episodic memory: levels of processing effect. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Statistical parametric maps in functional imaging: A general linear approach , 1994 .

[10]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  Discrete Cortical Regions Associated with Knowledge of Color and Knowledge of Action , 1995, Science.

[11]  R. Malach,et al.  Object-related activity revealed by functional magnetic resonance imaging in human occipital cortex. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  J. Hodges,et al.  Charting the progression in semantic dementia: implications for the organisation of semantic memory. , 1995 .

[13]  J. Hodges,et al.  Charting the progression in semantic dementia: implications for the organisation of semantic memory. , 1995, Memory.

[14]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Inferotemporal cortex and object vision. , 1996, Annual review of neuroscience.

[15]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  Neural correlates of category-specific knowledge , 1996, Nature.

[16]  Randall J. Frank,et al.  Explaining category-related effects in the retrieval of conceptual and lexical knowledge for concrete entities: operationalization and analysis of factors , 1997, Neuropsychologia.

[17]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  The Fusiform Face Area: A Module in Human Extrastriate Cortex Specialized for Face Perception , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[18]  A. Damasio,et al.  A neural basis for the retrieval of conceptual knowledge , 1997, Neuropsychologia.

[19]  S. Edelman,et al.  Human Brain Mapping 6:316–328(1998) � A Sequence of Object-Processing Stages Revealed by fMRI in the Human Occipital Lobe , 2022 .

[20]  M. Mesulam,et al.  From sensation to cognition. , 1998, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[21]  H. Soininen,et al.  MR volumetric analysis of the human entorhinal, perirhinal, and temporopolar cortices. , 1998, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[22]  A. Caramazza,et al.  Domain-Specific Knowledge Systems in the Brain: The Animate-Inanimate Distinction , 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[23]  L. Tyler,et al.  ‘Two Eyes of a See-through’: Impaired and Intact Semantic Knowledge in a Case of Selective Deficit for Living Things , 1998 .

[24]  L K Tyler,et al.  Category-specific semantic deficits: the role of familiarity and property type reexamined. , 1998, Neuropsychology.

[25]  D. Gaffan,et al.  Perirhinal Cortex Ablation Impairs Visual Object Identification , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[26]  C. Price,et al.  A functional neuroimaging study of the variables that generate category-specific object processing differences. , 1999, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[27]  W. Fitch,et al.  The Origin and Diversification of Language , 1999 .

[28]  T. Bussey,et al.  Perceptual–mnemonic functions of the perirhinal cortex , 1999, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[29]  M. Tarr,et al.  Activation of the middle fusiform 'face area' increases with expertise in recognizing novel objects , 1999, Nature Neuroscience.

[30]  K. Amunts,et al.  Brodmann's Areas 17 and 18 Brought into Stereotaxic Space—Where and How Variable? , 2000, NeuroImage.

[31]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Voxel-Based Morphometry—The Methods , 2000, NeuroImage.

[32]  Matthew H. Davis,et al.  Susceptibility-Induced Loss of Signal: Comparing PET and fMRI on a Semantic Task , 2000, NeuroImage.

[33]  B. Kendall,et al.  Structural MRI volumetric analysis in patients with organic amnesia, 1: methods and comparative findings across diagnostic groups , 2001, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[34]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Voxel-Based Morphometry of Herpes Simplex Encephalitis , 2001, NeuroImage.

[35]  Michael Wilson MRC Psycholinguistic Database , 2001 .

[36]  Chris Rorden,et al.  Spatial Normalization of Brain Images with Focal Lesions Using Cost Function Masking , 2001, NeuroImage.

[37]  A. Damasio,et al.  A role for left temporal pole in the retrieval of words for unique entities , 2001, Human brain mapping.

[38]  L. Tyler,et al.  Towards a distributed account of conceptual knowledge , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[39]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  The lateral occipital complex and its role in object recognition , 2001, Vision Research.

[40]  Alex Martin,et al.  Semantic memory and the brain: structure and processes , 2001, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[41]  L. Saksida,et al.  Perirhinal cortex resolves feature ambiguity in complex visual discriminations , 2002, The European journal of neuroscience.

[42]  Matthew H. Davis,et al.  Is there an anatomical basis for category-specificity? Semantic memory studies in PET and fMRI , 2002, Neuropsychologia.

[43]  L. Saksida,et al.  The organization of visual object representations: a connectionist model of effects of lesions in perirhinal cortex , 2002, The European journal of neuroscience.

[44]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Dissociations in Processing Past Tense Morphology: Neuropathology and Behavioral Studies , 2002, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[45]  Paul J Reber,et al.  Encoding activity in the medial temporal lobe examined with anatomically constrained fMRI analysis , 2002, Hippocampus.

[46]  P. Fletcher,et al.  DO SEMANTIC CATEGORIES ACTIVATE DISTINCT CORTICAL REGIONS? EVIDENCE FOR A DISTRIBUTED NEURAL SEMANTIC SYSTEM , 2003, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[47]  Sergio E. Chaigneau,et al.  THE SIMILARITY-IN-TOPOGRAPHY PRINCIPLE: RECONCILING THEORIES OF CONCEPTUAL DEFICITS , 2003, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[48]  J. Moake,et al.  This article has been cited by other articles , 2003 .

[49]  Kenneth I Forster,et al.  DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy , 2003, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[50]  Jane E Joseph,et al.  Cortical regions associated with different aspects of object recognition performance , 2004, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[51]  L. Saksida,et al.  Object memory and perception in the medial temporal lobe: an alternative approach , 2005, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[52]  J. Lucas,et al.  Disorders of memory. , 2005, The Psychiatric clinics of North America.

[53]  S. Moses,et al.  Differential contributions of hippocampus, amygdala and perirhinal cortex to recognition of novel objects, contextual stimuli and stimulus relationships , 2005, Brain Research Bulletin.

[54]  S. Moses,et al.  Relational memory for object identity and spatial location in rats with lesions of perirhinal cortex, amygdala and hippocampus , 2005, Brain Research Bulletin.

[55]  Angela R Laird,et al.  Meta‐analyses of object naming: Effect of baseline , 2005, Human brain mapping.