» Articles » PMID: 11305901

Distinct Neural Systems for the Encoding and Recognition of Topography and Faces

Overview
Journal Neuroimage
Specialty Radiology
Date 2001 Apr 18
PMID 11305901
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

In a series of three positron emission tomography experiments the functional neuroanatomy of four different types of visual stimuli was investigated within the same experimental context. The stimuli were unknown buildings, landscapes, human faces, and animal faces. The purpose of the present study was to compare the stimulus types, both within the same category and across category, by examining if, at encoding (with several seconds exposure to each stimulus) or recognition (over time scales of minutes compared to the seconds of usual perception/one-back studies), common or different neural circuits were activated for all types/categories of stimuli. Within category and although visually very different, the encoding of both buildings and landscapes activated a similar set of brain regions, including bilateral parahippocampal gyrus. This was in contrast to the encoding of both human and animal faces, both of which resulted in activation of the fusiform gyrus bilaterally. Despite the perceptual inputs being identical to those during encoding, the recognition of both buildings and landscapes activated only unilateral right parahippocampal gyrus, while recognition of both human and animal faces activated unilateral right fusiform gyrus. In addition, right superior frontal gyrus and right inferior and medial parietal areas were more active during recognition compared with encoding for all stimulus types. Overall the data identify differential patterns of activation for encoding compared with retrieval of visual stimuli. Furthermore, medial temporal structures specifically are involved in the explicit learning and long-term recognition of topographically relevant stimuli, be they buildings or landscapes, while lateral temporal structures support nontopographical learning and recognition, in this case either human or animal faces.

Citing Articles

Objects sharpen visual scene representations: evidence from MEG decoding.

Brandman T, Peelen M Cereb Cortex. 2023; 33(16):9524-9531.

PMID: 37365829 PMC: 10431745. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhad222.


Therapist reactions to patient personality: A pilot study of clinicians' emotional and neural responses using three clinical vignettes from in treatment series.

Tanzilli A, Trentini C, Grecucci A, Carone N, Ciacchella C, Lai C Front Hum Neurosci. 2022; 16:1037486.

PMID: 36518564 PMC: 9742247. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2022.1037486.


Human faces and face-like stimuli are more memorable.

Kapsetaki M, Zeki S Psych J. 2022; 11(5):715-719.

PMID: 35666065 PMC: 9796299. DOI: 10.1002/pchj.564.


Face Processing in Developmental Prosopagnosia: Altered Neural Representations in the Fusiform Face Area.

Haeger A, Pouzat C, Luecken V, NDiaye K, Elger C, Kennerknecht I Front Behav Neurosci. 2021; 15:744466.

PMID: 34867227 PMC: 8636799. DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2021.744466.


Spatially Adjacent Regions in Posterior Cingulate Cortex Represent Familiar Faces at Different Levels of Complexity.

Afzalian N, Rajimehr R J Neurosci. 2021; 41(47):9807-9826.

PMID: 34670848 PMC: 8612644. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1580-20.2021.