Taxonomic and thematic semantic systems.

Mirman, Daniel; Landrigan, Jon Frederick; Britt, Allison E.

doi:10.1037/bul0000092

Cited by 171 publications

(185 citation statements)

References 229 publications

(345 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

172

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Martin et al, 2016; Tobia and Madan, 2017; see Binkofski and Buxbaum, 2013; for discussion). One possibility is that the relatively low probability of detection of action similarity results from a cognitive bias to rely upon “taxonomic” features such as function and appearance as well as typical “thematic” features such as location (e.g., “kitchen”) and temporal events (e.g., “birthday”) in categorization tasks (see Mirman et al, 2017 for review). The relatively stronger explicit awareness of attributes such as function, appearance, and location as compared to action attributes may be due, in turn, to the benefits and importance of the former in communication, naming, and perhaps “inner speech” (e.g., both bongo drums and oboe can be labeled as instruments; both pillow and comforters can be labeled as bedding).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensory and semantic activations evoked by action attributes of manipulable objects: Evidence from ERPs

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“Two route” theories of object-related action processing posit different temporal activation profiles of grasp-to-move actions (rapidly evoked based on object structure) versus skilled use actions (more slowly activated based on semantic knowledge). We capitalized on the exquisite temporal resolution and multidimensionality of Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) to directly test this hypothesis. Participants viewed manipulable objects (e.g., calculator) preceded by objects sharing either “grasp”, “use”, or no action attributes (e.g., bar of soap, keyboard, earring, respectively), as well as by action-unrelated but taxonomically-related objects (e.g., abacus); participants judged whether the two objects were related. The results showed more positive responses to “grasp-to-move” primed objects than “skilled use” primed objects or unprimed objects starting in the P1 (0–150 ms) time window and continuing onto the subsequent N1 and P2 components (150–300 ms), suggesting that only “grasp-to-move”, but not “skilled use”, actions may facilitate visual attention to object attributes. Furthermore, reliably reduced N400s (300–500 ms), an index of semantic processing, were observed to taxonomically primed and “skilled use” primed objects relative to unprimed objects, suggesting that “skilled use” action attributes are a component of distributed, multimodal semantic representations of objects. Together, our findings provide evidence supporting two-route theories by demonstrating that “grasp-to-move” and “skilled use” actions impact different aspects of object processing and highlight the relationship of “skilled use” information to other aspects of semantic memory.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensory and semantic activations evoked by action attributes of manipulable objects: Evidence from ERPs

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The precise role of AG in semantic processing is disputed. Some theories posit that AG acts as a semantic hub coding event-related or thematic semantic knowledge (Binder & Desai, 2011;Mirman, Landrigan, & Britt, 2017;Schwartz et al, 2011). Others have suggested that AG serves as a short-term buffer for recent multimodal experience (Humphreys & Lambon Ralph, 2014).…”

Section: Angular Gyrusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Barking up the right tree: Univariate and multivariate fMRI analyses of homonym comprehension

Hoffman

Tamm

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Homonyms are a critical test case for investigating how the brain resolves ambiguity in language and, more generally, how context influences semantic processing. Previous neuroimaging studies have associated processing of homonyms with greater engagement of regions involved in executive control of semantic processing. However, the precise role of these areas and the involvement of semantic representational regions in homonym comprehension remain elusive. We addressed this by combining univariate and multivariate fMRI analyses of homonym processing. We tested whether multi-voxel activation patterns could discriminate between presentations of the same homonym in different contexts (e.g., bark following tree vs. bark following dog). The angular gyrus and ventral anterior temporal lobe, regions implicated in semantic representation but not previously in homonym comprehension, showed this meaning-specific coding, despite not showing increased mean activation for homonyms. Within inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), a key site for semantic control, there was a dissociation between BA47, which also showed meaning-specific coding, and BA45, which discriminated more generally between semantically related and unrelated word pairs. Unlike the representational regions, IFG effects were goal-dependent, only occurring when the task required semantic processing, in line with a top-down control function. Finally, posterior middle temporal cortex showed a hybrid pattern of responses, supporting the idea that it acts as an interface between semantic representations and the control system. The study provides new evidence for context-dependent coding in the semantic system and clarifies the role of control regions in processing ambiguity. It also highlights the importance of combining univariate and multivariate neuroimaging data to fully elucidate the role of a brain region in semantic cognition.

show abstract

“…umans can describe the potentially infinite features of the world and communicate with others using a finite number of words. To make this possible, our brains need to encode semantics 1 , infer concepts from experiences 2 , relate one concept to another 3,4 , and learn new concepts 5 . Central to these cognitive functions is the brain's semantic system 6 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Connecting concepts in the brain by mapping cortical representations of semantic relations

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the brain, the semantic system is thought to store concepts. However, little is known about how it connects different concepts and infers semantic relations. To address this question, we collected hours of functional magnetic resonance imaging data from human subjects listening to natural stories. We developed a predictive model of the voxel-wise response and further applied it to thousands of new words. Our results suggest that both semantic categories and relations are represented by spatially overlapping cortical patterns, instead of anatomically segregated regions. Semantic relations that reflect conceptual progression from concreteness to abstractness are represented by cortical patterns of activation in the default mode network and deactivation in the frontoparietal attention network. We conclude that the human brain uses distributed networks to encode not only concepts but also relationships between concepts. In particular, the default mode network plays a central role in semantic processing for abstraction of concepts.

show abstract

Taxonomic and thematic semantic systems.

Cited by 171 publications

References 229 publications

Sensory and semantic activations evoked by action attributes of manipulable objects: Evidence from ERPs

Sensory and semantic activations evoked by action attributes of manipulable objects: Evidence from ERPs

Barking up the right tree: Univariate and multivariate fMRI analyses of homonym comprehension

Connecting concepts in the brain by mapping cortical representations of semantic relations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About