A role for left temporal pole in the retrieval of words for unique entities

Abstract

Both lesion and functional imaging studies have implicated sectors of high-order association cortices of the left temporal lobe in the retrieval of words for objects belonging to varied conceptual categories. In particular, the cortices located in the left temporal pole have been associated with naming unique persons from faces. Because this neuroanatomical-behavioral association might be related to either the specificity of the task (retrieving a name at unique level) or to the possible preferential processing of faces by anterior temporal cortices, we performed a PET imaging experiment to test the hypothesis that the effect is related to the specificity of the word retrieval task. Normal subjects were asked to name at unique level entities from two conceptual categories: famous landmarks and famous faces. In support of the hypothesis, naming entities in both categories was associated with increases in activity in the left temporal pole. No main effect of category (faces vs. landmarks/buildings) or interaction of task and category was found in the left temporal pole. Retrieving names for unique persons and for names for unique landmarks activate the same brain region. These findings are consistent with the notion that activity in the left temporal pole is linked to the level of specificity of word retrieval rather than the conceptual class to which the stimulus belongs.

Neural systems underlying lexical retrieval for sign language

“…Therefore, the coordinate reported here is not distinguishable from that reported for English speakers. The contrast between the control task and naming famous persons revealed activation in the temporal pole that was predicted, and which also falls within a 15 mm radius of the activation found previously for English speakers [15,[24][25][26]. In addition, there was activation of the left anterior superior temporal sulcus, which has also been reported previously, at a coordinate 5 mm away from that reported here [15,22,26].…”

“…5. To provide a direct comparison with the results from hearing English speakers, data from [15,16,26] are listed in Table 3.…”

“…Thus, subjects made a signed response, but no naming was involved. This task was chosen because unknown faces do not evoke a name and yet depict real entities at least as complex as the stimuli presented in the other naming tasks, and it is the task used in parallel studies with hearing English speakers [15,16,26]. Similarly, the various ISIs for each naming task were chosen to parallel the ISI times in the Damasio et al study [15], and these times were selected to equate naming performance across tasks.…”

Evolution of the base of the brain in highly encephalized human species

“…Th erefore, palaeoneurological interpretation of evolutionary variations in cerebral surface such as refl ected in the basal endocranium in functional terms remains a challenge 3,6 -8,12 . Although diff erent regions of the prefrontal cortex (frontal lobes) have been associated with higher integrative and social functions, (for example, decision making) 12,20 -24 , regions of the temporal lobes are traditionally related to visual memory, language and to theory of mind 24,54,55 . All of them are compatible with higher olfactory functions 44 .…”

More “mapping” in brain mapping: Statistical comparison of effects

“…For example, 21 articles published in Human Brain Mapping in 2001 reported voxel-based analyses of functional effects observed with PET or fMRI, and exhibited the regional pattern using a color-mask superimposed on structural images. Two of these articles [Crespo-Facorro et al, 2001;Grabowski et al, 2001], both from Iowa City, provided informative effect size maps meeting the criteria suggested in this article. In the remaining 19 of 21 articles, however, only the positions of voxels with EES exceeding the investigators' criteria for significance were displayed.…”