Neural circuits of hierarchical visuo-spatial sequence processing

Bahlmann, Joerg; Schubotz, Ricarda Ines; Mueller, Jutta L.; Koester, Dirk; Friederici, Angela D.

doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2009.08.017

Cited by 87 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is in line with a recent proposal that learning the rules requires explicit feedback (e.g., Ashby et al, 1999;Opitz, Ferdinand, Mecklinger, 2011). A recent study on L2 learning compared native and non-native speakers after brief exposure to correct Italian sentences without any feedback (Mueller et al, 2009). From the diverging pattern of brain responses between native and non-native speakers it can be inferred that non-native speakers did not acquire an abstract representation of the underlying syntactic rules after mere exposure to simple Italian sentences suggesting that feedback is necessary for the acquisition of a grammatical rule set.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Schubotz (2007) proposed that the PMC serves as a predictive system, not only for human-like actions, but also for abstract sequences such as music or sea-waves, which cannot be mirrored by any human movement. This predictive role has also been suggested for the processing of grammatical rule systems (Bahlmann et al, 2009). In the present study, the abstract level of violations appeared to be of importance also in superficial strategies, implying the PMC as a further contributor to the processes in the right IFG.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…Previous studies suggested that the PMC is crucially involved in the processing of so called local or adjacent dependencies that can be fully specified by transition probabilities between neighboring elements in a sequence. Functional imaging studies (Bahlmann et al, 2009;Opitz & Friederici, 2007) as well as studies on patients with lesions centered in the PMC (Opitz & Kotz, in press) consistently demonstrated the involvement of the PMC in processing violations of such adjacent dependencies. In contrast, hierarchical structures, characterized by long-distance dependencies, have been shown to depend on left inferior frontal areas.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Rule and similarity in grammar: Their interplay and individual differences in the brain

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rule and similarity in grammar: Their interplay and individual differences in the brain

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These original findings have been confirmed by other neuroimaging studies, with variations of both the grammatical rules of reference (Musso et al, 2003) and the cognitive domain (Tettamanti et al, 2009). However, it must be noted that whereas the preferential activation of the left BA 44 for linguistic versus nonlinguistic syntactic rules has been consistently reported in a number of further studies (e.g., Bahlmann, Schubotz, Mueller, Koester, & Friederici, 2009;Bahlmann, Schubotz, & Friederici, 2008;Friederici, Bahlmann, Heim, Schubotz, & Anwander, 2006;Hoen, Pachot-Clouard, Segebarth, & Dominey, 2006), the preferential activation of the right BA 44 for nonlinguistic versus linguistic rules has either not been found or not been investigated.…”

Section: Communicative Modalitiesmentioning

confidence: 92%

Intention Processing in Communication: A Common Brain Network for Language and Gestures

Enrici

Adenzato

Cappa

et al. 2011

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract■ Human communicative competence is based on the ability to process a specific class of mental states, namely, communicative intention. The present fMRI study aims to analyze whether intention processing in communication is affected by the expressive means through which a communicative intention is conveyed, that is, the linguistic or extralinguistic gestural means. Combined factorial and conjunction analyses were used to test two sets of predictions: first, that a common brain network is recruited for the comprehension of communicative intentions independently of the modality through which they are conveyed; second, that additional brain areas are specifically recruited depending on the communicative modality used, reflecting distinct sensorimotor gateways. Our results clearly showed that a common neural network is engaged in communicative intention processing independently of the modality used. This network includes the precuneus, the left and right posterior STS and TPJ, and the medial pFC. Additional brain areas outside those involved in intention processing are specifically engaged by the particular communicative modality, that is, a peri-sylvian language network for the linguistic modality and a sensorimotor network for the extralinguistic modality. Thus, common representation of communicative intention may be accessed by modality-specific gateways, which are distinct for linguistic versus extralinguistic expressive means. Taken together, our results indicate that the information acquired by different communicative modalities is equivalent from a mental processing standpoint, in particular, at the point at which the actorʼs communicative intention has to be reconstructed. ■

show abstract

“…Some empirical paradigms have been considered relevant to address the topic [15][16][17][18] but because they fail to capture the distinction between recursion and hierarchical embedding, over-interpreting the results may be misleading [12,19].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distinctive signatures of recursion

Martins

2012

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although recursion has been hypothesized to be a necessary capacity for the evolution of language, the multiplicity of definitions being used has undermined the broader interpretation of empirical results. I propose that only a definition focused on representational abilities allows the prediction of specific behavioural traits that enable us to distinguish recursion from non-recursive iteration and from hierarchical embedding: only subjects able to represent recursion, i.e. to represent different hierarchical dependencies (related by parenthood) with the same set of rules, are able to generalize and produce new levels of embedding beyond those specified a priori (in the algorithm or in the input). The ability to use such representations may be advantageous in several domains: action sequencing, problem-solving, spatial navigation, social navigation and for the emergence of conventionalized communication systems. The ability to represent contiguous hierarchical levels with the same rules may lead subjects to expect unknown levels and constituents to behave similarly, and this prior knowledge may bias learning positively. Finally, a new paradigm to test for recursion is presented. Preliminary results suggest that the ability to represent recursion in the spatial domain recruits both visual and verbal resources. Implications regarding language evolution are discussed.

show abstract

Neural circuits of hierarchical visuo-spatial sequence processing

Cited by 87 publications

References 56 publications

Rule and similarity in grammar: Their interplay and individual differences in the brain

Rule and similarity in grammar: Their interplay and individual differences in the brain

Intention Processing in Communication: A Common Brain Network for Language and Gestures

Distinctive signatures of recursion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About