4.7 Article

Category-specific activations during word generation reflect experiential sensorimotor modalities

Journal

NEUROIMAGE
Volume 48, Issue 4, Pages 717-725

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.06.042

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01-NS43999]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

According to the sensorimotor theory of lexicosemantic organization, semantic representations are neurally distributed and anatomically linked to category-specific sensory areas. Previous functional neuroimaging studies have demonstrated category specificity in lexicosemantic representations. However, little evidence is available from word generation paradigms, which provide access to semantic representations while minimizing confounds resulting from low-level perceptual features of stimulus presentation. In this study, 13 healthy young adults underwent fMRI scanning while performing a word generation task, generating exemplars to nine different semantic categories. Each semantic category was assigned to one of three superordinate category types, based upon sensorimotor modalities (visual, motor, somatosensory) presumed to predominate in lexical acquisition. For word generation overall, robust activation was seen in left inferior frontal cortex. Analyses by sensorimotor modality categories yielded activations in brain regions related to perceptual and motor processing: Visual categories activated extrastriate cortex, motor categories activated the intraparietal sulcus and posterior middle temporal cortex, and somatosensory categories activated postcentral and inferior parietal regions. Our results are consistent with the sensorimotor theory, according to which lexicosemantic representations are distributed across brain regions participating in sensorimotor processing associated with the experiential components of lexicosemantic acquisition. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available