Dissociating the neural correlates of the sociality and plausibility effects in simple conceptual combination

Lin, Nan; Xu, Yangwen; Yang, Huichao; Zhang, Guangyao; Zhang, Meimei; Wang, Shaonan; Hua, Huimin; Li, Xingshan

doi:10.1007/s00429-020-02052-3

Cited by 17 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The last view regarding the function of the DMN in semantic processes holds that the DMN consists of multiple subnetworks that support different aspects of semantic processes separately (Huth et al 2016;Lin et al 2020). We refer to this view as the multisystem view of the DMN.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Later, using a semantic plausibility judgment task, Lin et al (2020) further found that another set of regions, which also overlaps with the DMN, is sensitive to the semantic plausibility of phrases. Again, the AG and its surrounding areas showed complex functional dissociation, with the anterior dorsal part being sensitive to semantic plausibility, the anterior ventral part being sensitive to social semantic processing, the posterior part being sensitive to sensory-motor semantic processing, and the middle ventral part being sensitive to both social and sensory-motor semantic processing (Lin et al 2020). In summary, these studies have collectively indicated that different parts of the DMN are sensitive to different aspects of semantic processing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Coexistence of the social semantic effect and non-semantic effect in the default mode network

2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neuroimaging studies have found both semantic and non-semantic effects in the default mode network (DMN), leading to an intense debate on the role of the DMN in semantic processes. Four different views have been proposed: 1) The general semantic view holds that the DMN contains several hub regions supporting general semantic processes; 2) the non-semantic view holds that the semantic effects observed in most regions of the DMN (especially the ventral angular gyrus) are confounded by di culty and do not re ect semantic processing per se; 3) the multifunction view holds that the same areas in the DMN can support both semantic and non-semantic functions; and 4) the multisystem view holds that the DMN contains multiple subnetworks supporting different aspects of semantic processes separately. Using an fMRI experiment, we found that in one of the subnetworks of the DMN, called the social semantic network, all areas showed social semantic activation and di culty-induced deactivation. The ventral angular gyrus, whose function had been interpreted according to the di culty effect, showed social semantic activation independent of di culty. In addition, the distributions of two non-semantic effects, that is, di culty-induced and taskinduced deactivations, showed dissociation in the DMN. Our ndings provide two insights into the semantic and non-semantic functions of the DMN, which are consistent with both the multisystem and multifunction views: First, the same areas of the DMN can support both social semantic and non-semantic functions; second, similar to the multiple semantic effects of the DMN, the non-semantic effects also vary across its subsystems.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coexistence of the social semantic effect and non-semantic effect in the default mode network

2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, studies have shown that preferential left hemisphere dorsolateral/polar ATL activation cannot be easily explained by differences in concreteness, or at least imageability, between social concepts and control categories [38,64,65,71], nor by differing degrees of multiplicity of single word meanings (sometimes referred to as 'semantic diversity' [72]) [38]. A putative involvement of these regions in combinatorial conceptual processes does also not appear to explain differential engagement by social and non-social concepts [73,74]. Many of these studies have also been careful to rule out explanations in terms of fundamental lexical properties such as word frequency or syllable/word length [38,64,65,68].…”

Section: Part B -Socialness Concepts and The Brainmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To illustrate this point, we have collected examples in Table 1 (also see [35]). Many of these studies focused on a word's reference to social interaction by measuring, for example, the extent to which a concept refers to relationships between people [23,24] or how often its referent involves interaction between people [64,65,71,74]. In contrast, other definitions emphasize specific aspects of social experience, such as how well a concept describes social behaviours [36], or the degree to which concepts relate to the relationship between self and others [102].…”

Section: Part C -What Is 'Socialness'?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Semantics: The Organisation and Grounding of Abstract Concepts

Pexman¹,

Diveica²,

Binney³

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

concepts, like justice and friendship, are a central feature of our daily lives. Traditionally, abstract concepts are distinguished from other concepts in that they cannot be directly experienced through the senses. As such, they pose a challenge for strongly embodied models of semantic representation that assume a central role for sensorimotor information. There is growing recognition, however, that it is possible for meaning to be ‘grounded’ via cognitive systems, including those involved in processing language and emotion. In this article, we focus on the specific proposal that social significance is a key feature in the representation of some concepts. We begin by reviewing recent evidence in favour of this proposal from the fields of cognitive science and neuroimaging. We then discuss the limited extent to which there is consensus about the definition of ‘socialness’ and propose essential next steps for research in this domain. Taking one such step, we describe preliminary data from an unprecedented large-scale rating study that can help determine how socialness is distinct from other facets of word meaning. We provide a backdrop of contemporary theories regarding semantic representation and social cognition and highlight important predictions for both brain and behaviour.

show abstract

“…Previous studies of conceptual combination have endeavored to uncover the neural basis of understanding multiword phrases/sentences (see review in Frankland and Greene 2020) and understanding multi-object scenes (Baeck et al 2013;Baldassano et al 2017;Kaiser and Peelen 2018;Walbrin and Koldewyn 2019). Using language, mostly with adjective-noun phrases (e.g., red boat), researchers found that the bilateral angular gyrus (AG; Bemis and Pylkkänen 2013;Forgács et al 2012;Graves et al 2010;Lin et al 2020;Pallier et al 2011;Price et al 2015;Price et al 2016) and anterior temporal lobe (ATL; Bemis and Pylkkänen 2011;Pallier et al 2011;Pylkkänen et al 2014;Westerlund et al 2015;Westerlund and Pylkkänen 2014) play important semantic composition roles in contrasts between meaningful and non-meaningful word pairs (e.g., activation for "red boat" > for "xkq boat" or "plaid jacket" > "moss pony"). Lin et al (2020) examined verb-noun phrases and revealed two adjacently distributed subnetworks for sociality semantic and semantic combinations using similar univariate contrasts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From words to phrases: neural basis of social event semantic composition

Yang

2022

Brain Struct Funct

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Events are typically composed of at least actions and entities. Both actions and entities have been shown to be represented by neural structures respecting domain organizations in the brain, including those of social/animate (face and body; person-directed action) versus inanimate (man-made object or tool; object-directed action) concepts. It is unclear whether the brain combines actions and entities into events in a (relative) domain-specific fashion or via domain-general mechanisms in regions that have been shown to support semantic and syntactic composition. We tested these hypotheses in a functional magnetic resonance imaging experiment where two domains of verb-noun event phrases (social-person versus manipulation-artifact, e.g., “hug mother” versus “fold napkin”) and their component words were contrasted. We found a series of brain region supporting social-composition effects more strongly than the manipulation phrase composition—the bilateral inferior occipital gyrus (IOG), inferior temporal gyrus (ITG) and anterior temporal lobe (ATL)—which either showed stronger activation strength tested by univariate contrast, stronger content representation tested by representation similarity analysis, or stronger relationship between the neural activation patterns of phrases and synthesis (additive and multiplication) of the neural activity patterns of the word constituents. No regions were observed showing evidence of phrase composition for both domains or stronger effects of manipulation phrases. These findings highlight the roles of the visual cortex and ATL in social event compositions, suggesting a domain-preferring, rather than domain-general, mechanisms of verbal event composition.

show abstract

Dissociating the neural correlates of the sociality and plausibility effects in simple conceptual combination

Cited by 17 publications

References 60 publications

Coexistence of the social semantic effect and non-semantic effect in the default mode network

Coexistence of the social semantic effect and non-semantic effect in the default mode network

Social Semantics: The Organisation and Grounding of Abstract Concepts

From words to phrases: neural basis of social event semantic composition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About