2018
DOI: 10.1101/268144
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Neural responses to naturalistic clips of behaving animals in two different task contexts

Abstract: Neuroimaging studies of object and action representation often use controlled stimuli and implicitly assume that the relevant neural representational spaces are fixed and context-invariant. Here we present functional MRI data measured while participants freely viewed brief naturalistic video clips of behaving animals in two different task contexts. Participants performed a 1-back category repetition detection task requiring them to attend to either animal taxonomy or animal behavior. The data and analysis code… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 76 publications
(59 reference statements)
4
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The mean FD was 0.138 mm (SD = 0.06) and there were 34.52 (SD = 74.72) timepoints above a 0.50 mm threshold on average (of 6998.20 timepoints or 0.49% of the data on average). Our mean FD compares favorably to 0.12 107 , 0.13 108 , 0.15 109 , 0.18 110 and 0.24 mm 111 in other studies with typically developing participants watching videos or movies during fMRI.…”
Section: Technical Validationsupporting
confidence: 63%
“…The mean FD was 0.138 mm (SD = 0.06) and there were 34.52 (SD = 74.72) timepoints above a 0.50 mm threshold on average (of 6998.20 timepoints or 0.49% of the data on average). Our mean FD compares favorably to 0.12 107 , 0.13 108 , 0.15 109 , 0.18 110 and 0.24 mm 111 in other studies with typically developing participants watching videos or movies during fMRI.…”
Section: Technical Validationsupporting
confidence: 63%
“…Temporal SNR is expected to vary across areas due to signal susceptibility artifacts, differences in anatomy across subjects, and overall subject arousal levels during the scan 45 . The mean whole-brain tSNR across subjects was 74.42 ± 3.91, which is comparable to previous datasets 50,51 . As expected, temporal SNR varied across areas, with higher tSNR in dorsal areas, and lower tSNR in anterior temporal cortex and orbito-frontal cortex (see Fig.…”
Section: Technical Validationsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Temporal SNR is expected to vary across areas due to signal susceptibility artifacts, differences in anatomy across subjects, and overall subject arousal levels during the scan 45 . The mean whole-brain tSNR across subjects was 74.42 ± 3.91, which is comparable to previous datasets 49,50 . As expected, temporal SNR varied across areas, with higher tSNR in dorsal areas, and lower tSNR in anterior temporal cortex and orbito-frontal cortex (see Figure 2).…”
Section: Technical Validationsupporting
confidence: 85%