» Articles » PMID: 21397616

Shape from Sound: Evidence for a Shape Operator in the Lateral Occipital Cortex

Overview
Specialties Neurology
Psychology
Date 2011 Mar 15
PMID 21397616
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

A recent view of cortical functional specialization suggests that the primary organizing principle of the cortex is based on task requirements, rather than sensory modality. Consistent with this view, recent evidence suggests that a region of the lateral occipitotemporal cortex (LO) may process object shape information regardless of the modality of sensory input. There is considerable evidence that area LO is involved in processing visual and haptic shape information. However, sound can also carry acoustic cues to an object's shape, for example, when a sound is produced by an object's impact with a surface. Thus, the current study used auditory stimuli that were created from recordings of objects impacting a hard surface to test the hypothesis that area LO is also involved in auditory shape processing. The objects were of two shapes, rods and balls, and of two materials, metal and wood. Subjects were required to categorize the impact sounds in one of three tasks, (1) by the shape of the object while ignoring material, (2) by the material of the object while ignoring shape, or (3) by using all the information available. Area LO was more strongly recruited when subjects discriminated impact sounds based on the shape of the object that made them, compared to when subjects discriminated those same sounds based on material. The current findings suggest that activation in area LO is shape selective regardless of sensory input modality, and are consistent with an emerging theory of perceptual functional specialization of the brain that is task-based rather than sensory modality-based.

Citing Articles

A meta-analysis of letter-sound integration: Assimilation and accommodation in the superior temporal gyrus.

Gao D, Liang X, Ting Q, Nichols E, Bai Z, Xu C Hum Brain Mapp. 2024; 45(15):e26713.

PMID: 39447213 PMC: 11501095. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.26713.


Generalisation to novel exemplars of learned shape categories based on visual and auditory spatial cues does not benefit from multisensory information.

ODowd A, Hirst R, Seveso M, McKenna E, Newell F Psychon Bull Rev. 2024; 32(1):417-429.

PMID: 39103708 PMC: 11836203. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-024-02548-7.


A computational examination of the two-streams hypothesis: which pathway needs a longer memory?.

Alipour A, Beggs J, Brown J, James T Cogn Neurodyn. 2022; 16(1):149-165.

PMID: 35126775 PMC: 8807798. DOI: 10.1007/s11571-021-09703-z.


Analysis of haptic information in the cerebral cortex.

Sathian K J Neurophysiol. 2016; 116(4):1795-1806.

PMID: 27440247 PMC: 5144710. DOI: 10.1152/jn.00546.2015.


CROSSMODAL AND MULTISENSORY INTERACTIONS BETWEEN VISION AND TOUCH.

Lacey S, Sathian K Scholarpedia J. 2016; 10(3):7957.

PMID: 26783412 PMC: 4715428. DOI: 10.4249/scholarpedia.7957.


References
1.
Warren Jr W, Verbrugge R . Auditory perception of breaking and bouncing events: a case study in ecological acoustics. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1984; 10(5):704-12. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.10.5.704. View

2.
Freed D . Auditory correlates of perceived mallet hardness for a set of recorded percussive sound events. J Acoust Soc Am. 1990; 87(1):311-22. DOI: 10.1121/1.399298. View

3.
Van Essen D . Corticocortical and thalamocortical information flow in the primate visual system. Prog Brain Res. 2005; 149:173-85. DOI: 10.1016/S0079-6123(05)49013-5. View

4.
Grassi M . Do we hear size or sound? Balls dropped on plates. Percept Psychophys. 2005; 67(2):274-84. DOI: 10.3758/bf03206491. View

5.
James T, Kim S, Fisher J . The neural basis of haptic object processing. Can J Exp Psychol. 2007; 61(3):219-29. DOI: 10.1037/cjep2007023. View