"Presemantic" Cognition in Semantic Dementia: Six Deficits in Search of an Explanation

Patterson, Karalyn; Ralph, Matthew A. Lambon; Jefferies, Elizabeth; Woollams, Anna M.; Jones, Roy; Hodges, John R.; Rogers, Timothy T.

doi:10.1162/089892906775783714

Cited by 61 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 52 publications

(30 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with this, semantic dementia, a neurodegenerative condition characterized by progressive deterioration of semantic knowledge is associated with atrophy to the temporal poles (Bozeat et al, 2000;Rogers et al, 2004). We note that patients with semantic dementia are typically impaired at object decision (e.g., judging whether drawings represented real or nonsense objects; Patterson et al, 2006), as well as perceptual discrimination of complex objects (Barense et al, 2010b). As such, it seems likely they would have been impaired at the realworld decision task required of our participants.…”

Section: Using Lateralized Presentationssupporting

confidence: 75%

The perirhinal cortex modulates V2 activity in response to the agreement between part familiarity and configuration familiarity

Peterson¹,

Cacciamani²,

Barense³

et al. 2012

Hippocampus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:Research has demonstrated that the perirhinal cortex (PRC) represents complex object-level feature configurations, and participates in familiarity versus novelty discrimination. Barense et al. [(in press) Cerebral Cortex, 22:11, doi:10.1093/cercor/bhr347] postulated that, in addition, the PRC modulates part familiarity responses in lower-level visual areas. We used fMRI to measure activation in the PRC and V2 in response to silhouettes presented peripherally while participants maintained central fixation and performed an object recognition task. There were three types of silhouettes: Familiar Configurations portrayed realworld objects; Part-Rearranged Novel Configurations created by spatially rearranging the parts of the familiar configurations; and Control Novel Configurations in which both the configuration and the ensemble of parts comprising it were novel. For right visual field (RVF) presentation, BOLD responses revealed a significant linear trend in bilateral BA 35 of the PRC (highest activation for Familiar Configurations, lowest for Part-Rearranged Novel Configurations, with Control Novel Configurations in between). For left visual field (LVF) presentation, a significant linear trend was found in a different area (bilateral BA 38, temporal pole) in the opposite direction (Part-Rearranged Novel Configurations highest, Familiar Configurations lowest). These data confirm that the PRC is sensitive to the agreement in familiarity between the configuration level and the part level. As predicted, V2 activation mimicked that of the PRC: for RVF presentation, activity in V2 was significantly higher in the left hemisphere for Familiar Configurations than for Part-Rearranged Novel Configurations, and for LVF presentation, the opposite effect was found in right hemisphere V2. We attribute these patterns in V2 to feedback from the PRC because receptive fields in V2 encompass parts but not configurations. These results reveal two new aspects of PRC function: (1) it is sensitive to the congruency between the familiarity of object configurations and the parts comprising those configurations and (2) it likely modulates familiarity responses in visual area V2. V V C 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

Section: Using Lateralized Presentationssupporting

confidence: 75%

The perirhinal cortex modulates V2 activity in response to the agreement between part familiarity and configuration familiarity

Peterson¹,

Cacciamani²,

Barense³

et al. 2012

Hippocampus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The hypothesis that the anterior temporal lobes function as a cross-modal "hub" is supported by neuroanatomical observations (Gloor, 1997), functional neuroimaging data (H. Damasio et al, 1996;Gauthier, Anderson, Tarr, Skudlarski, & Gore, 1997;Gorno-Tempini, Wenman, Price, Rudge, & Cipolotti, 2001;Nakamura et al, 2001;Rogers et al, 2006;Scott, Leff, & Wise, 2003), and computational arguments (Rogers, Lambon Ralph, & Garrard, et al, 2004;, in addition to neuropsychological observations from SD (Adlam, Patterson, Rogers, Salmond, & Hodges, 2006;Bozeat et al, 2000;Bozeat, Lambon Ralph, Patterson, & Hodges, 2002;Patterson et al, 2006;Rogers, Lambon Ralph, Hodges, & Patterson, 2004). …”

Section: The Pdp Theorymentioning

confidence: 95%

“…These correspondences, though clearly coarse abstractions at best of the real neural system, nevertheless provide a useful framework for understanding why anterior temporal-lobe pathology should produce the particular pattern of disruption to semantic abilities observed in SD. This understanding has allowed us to make new predictions about patterns of functional activation in healthy individuals (Hauk et al, 2006;Rogers, Hocking, Mechelli, Patterson, & Price, 2005;Rogers, Hocking, et al, in press), about patterns of impairment in SD on other kinds of tests (Adlam et al, 2006;Patterson et al, 2006), and in other neuropsychological syndromes (Lambon Ralph, Lowe, & Rogers, in press). Thus the PDP framework links the cognitive-level explanation of basic-level advantages offered by the differentiation theory to a neuroanatomical account that makes contact with neuropsychological and neuroimaging data.…”

Section: Relationship To Differentiation Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Object categorization: Reversals and explanations of the basic-level advantage.

Rogers

Patterson²

2007

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Self Cite

166

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People are generally faster and more accurate to name or categorize objects at the basic level (e.g., dog) relative to more general (animal) or specific (collie) levels, an effect replicated in Experiment 1 for categorization of object pictures. To some, this pattern suggests a dual-process mechanism, in which objects first activate basic-level categories directly and later engage more general or specific categories through the spread of activation in a processing hierarchy. This account is, however, challenged by data from Experiment 2 showing that neuropsychological patients with impairments of conceptual knowledge categorize more accurately at superordinate levels than at the basic level-suggesting that knowledge about an object's general nature does not depend on prior basic-level categorization. The authors consider how a parallel distributed processing theory of conceptual knowledge can reconcile the apparent discrepancy. This theory predicts that if healthy individuals are encouraged to make rapid categorization responses, the usual basic Ͼ general advantage should also reverse, a prediction tested and confirmed in Experiment 3. Implications for theories of visual object recognition are discussed.

show abstract

“…There is now clear evidence that there is a productive interaction between semantic and phonologic representations such that the phonologic activation and integrity of word forms is provided in part by input from the semantic system. 30,31 As such, if some words have intrinsically stronger underlying semantic representations then they may be more likely to be named and also respond better to therapy. Second, evidence from nonstroke clinical groups and functional neuroimaging in neurologically intact participants suggests that extra-sylvian regions (especially the basal anterior temporal lobe) play a critical role in semantic representation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Phonemic Cueing of Spontaneous Naming to Predict Item Responsiveness to Therapy for Anomia in Aphasia

Conroy

Snell

Sage

et al. 2012

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"Presemantic" Cognition in Semantic Dementia: Six Deficits in Search of an Explanation

Cited by 61 publications

References 52 publications

The perirhinal cortex modulates V2 activity in response to the agreement between part familiarity and configuration familiarity

The perirhinal cortex modulates V2 activity in response to the agreement between part familiarity and configuration familiarity

Object categorization: Reversals and explanations of the basic-level advantage.

Using Phonemic Cueing of Spontaneous Naming to Predict Item Responsiveness to Therapy for Anomia in Aphasia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About