Sounds of productive and perceptive actions engage distinct brain networks
-
1
Electroencephalography Brain Mapping Core, Center for Biomedical Imaging of Lausanne and Geneva, Switzerland
-
2
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois and University of Lausanne, Neuropsychology and Neurorehabilitation Service , Switzerland
-
3
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois and University of Lausanne, Switzerland
-
4
Service de Rééducation, University Hospital of Geneva, Switzerland
The identification of so-called mirror neurons responding both to one’s own performance of an action and to either seeing or hearing this action has produced growing interest in understanding how action representations might contribute to object recognition processes. One proposition is that object recognition is itself facilitated by such action representations. Alternatively, activity of action representations might occur subsequent to initial object recognition. Current evidence regarding the spatio-temporal mechanisms of auditory object processing by humans has largely focused on categorical discrimination (living vs. man-made objects). Responses to these categories differ within the initial 100ms post-stimulus onset and engage distinct networks of brain regions at later latencies. The extent to which such categorical discrimination is predicated or followed by processing of action representations and/or additional subordinate object features remains unresolved. Part of the uncertainty stems from hemodynamic imaging methods lacking the necessary temporal resolution to address issues of processing dynamics. Additionally, when responses to sounds of actions (e.g. tools) are contrasted with those to animal vocalizations, effects of semantic category cannot be readily differentiated from effects of associated action representations. We performed electrical neuroimaging analyses of 64-channel auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) from 10 participants in response to sounds of man-made objects. These sounds were further subdivided between those referring to productive actions and those referring to perceptive actions. Productive actions included sounds that in turn typically require an action by the listener when heard (e.g. a telephone ringing). Perceptive actions included sounds that typically do not require such (e.g. a single note on a piano). Beginning ~300ms post-stimulus onset, responses to productive actions significantly differed from those to perceptive actions both in terms of the strength and topography of the electric field. First, this latency is subsequent to that of living vs. man-made categorical discrimination. Second, such topographic differences indicate that sounds of different subtypes of actions engage distinct configurations of intracranial generators. Statistical analysis of source estimations identified differential activity within regions of the mirror neuron system (BA6, BA8, and BA45) in response to sounds of productive actions. We discuss our results in terms of a spatio-temporal model of auditory object processing.
Conference:
10th International Conference on Cognitive Neuroscience, Bodrum, Türkiye, 1 Sep - 5 Sep, 2008.
Presentation Type:
Poster Presentation
Topic:
Perceptual Processing and Recognition
Citation:
Murray
MM,
Camen
C,
De Lucia
M and
Clarke
S
(2008). Sounds of productive and perceptive actions engage distinct brain networks.
Conference Abstract:
10th International Conference on Cognitive Neuroscience.
doi: 10.3389/conf.neuro.09.2009.01.338
Copyright:
The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers.
They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters.
The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated.
Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed.
For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions.
Received:
15 Dec 2008;
Published Online:
15 Dec 2008.
*
Correspondence:
Micah M Murray, Electroencephalography Brain Mapping Core, Center for Biomedical Imaging of Lausanne and Geneva, Lausanne, Switzerland, micah.murray@hospvd.ch