fusiform face area
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

187
(FIVE YEARS 31)

H-INDEX

39
(FIVE YEARS 3)

Animals ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 108
Author(s):  
Kirsten D. Gillette ◽  
Erin M. Phillips ◽  
Daniel D. Dilks ◽  
Gregory S. Berns

Previous research to localize face areas in dogs’ brains has generally relied on static images or videos. However, most dogs do not naturally engage with two-dimensional images, raising the question of whether dogs perceive such images as representations of real faces and objects. To measure the equivalency of live and two-dimensional stimuli in the dog’s brain, during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) we presented dogs and humans with live-action stimuli (actors and objects) as well as videos of the same actors and objects. The dogs (n = 7) and humans (n = 5) were presented with 20 s blocks of faces and objects in random order. In dogs, we found significant areas of increased activation in the putative dog face area, and in humans, we found significant areas of increased activation in the fusiform face area to both live and video stimuli. In both dogs and humans, we found areas of significant activation in the posterior superior temporal sulcus (ectosylvian fissure in dogs) and the lateral occipital complex (entolateral gyrus in dogs) to both live and video stimuli. Of these regions of interest, only the area along the ectosylvian fissure in dogs showed significantly more activation to live faces than to video faces, whereas, in humans, both the fusiform face area and posterior superior temporal sulcus responded significantly more to live conditions than video conditions. However, using the video conditions alone, we were able to localize all regions of interest in both dogs and humans. Therefore, videos can be used to localize these regions of interest, though live conditions may be more salient.


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Di Wu ◽  
Pan Zhang ◽  
Na Liu ◽  
Kewei Sun ◽  
Wei Xiao

A basic human visual function is to identify objects from different viewpoints. Typically, the ability to discriminate face views based on in-depth orientation is necessary in daily life. Early neuroimaging studies have identified the involvement of the left fusiform face area (FFA) and the left superior temporal sulcus (STS) in face view discrimination. However, many studies have documented the important role of the right FFA in face processing. Thus, there remains controversy over whether one specific region or all of them are involved in discriminating face views. Thus, this research examined the influence of high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) over the left FFA, left STS or right FFA on face view discrimination in three experiments. In experiment 1, eighteen subjects performed a face view discrimination task before and immediately, 10 min and 20 min after anodal, cathodal and sham HD-tDCS (20 min, 1.5 mA) over the left FFA in three sessions. Compared with sham stimulation, anodal and cathodal stimulation had no effects that were detected at the group level. However, the analyses at the individual level showed that the baseline performance negatively correlated with the degree of change after anodal tDCS, suggesting a dependence of the change amount on the initial performance. Specifically, tDCS decreased performance in the subjects with better baseline performance but increased performance in those with poorer baseline performance. In experiments 2 and 3, the same experimental protocol was used except that the stimulation site was the left STS or right FFA, respectively. Neither anodal nor cathodal tDCS over the left STS or right FFA influenced face view discrimination in group- or individual-level analyses. These results not only indicated the importance of the left FFA in face view discrimination but also demonstrated that individual initial performance should be taken into consideration in future research and practical applications.


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexa Haeger ◽  
Christophe Pouzat ◽  
Volker Luecken ◽  
Karim N’Diaye ◽  
Christian Elger ◽  
...  

Rationale: Face expertise is a pivotal social skill. Developmental prosopagnosia (DP), i.e., the inability to recognize faces without a history of brain damage, affects about 2% of the general population, and is a renowned model system of the face-processing network. Within this network, the right Fusiform Face Area (FFA), is particularly involved in face identity processing and may therefore be a key element in DP. Neural representations within the FFA have been examined with Representational Similarity Analysis (RSA), a data-analytical framework in which multi-unit measures of brain activity are assessed with correlation analysis.Objectives: Our study intended to scrutinize modifications of FFA-activation during face encoding and maintenance based on RSA.Methods: Thirteen participants with DP (23–70 years) and 12 healthy control subjects (19–62 years) participated in a functional MRI study, including morphological MRI, a functional FFA-localizer and a modified Sternberg paradigm probing face memory encoding and maintenance. Memory maintenance of one, two, or four faces represented low, medium, and high memory load. We examined conventional activation differences in response to working memory load and applied RSA to compute individual correlation-matrices on the voxel level. Group correlation-matrices were compared via Donsker’s random walk analysis.Results: On the functional level, increased memory load entailed both a higher absolute FFA-activation level and a higher degree of correlation between activated voxels. Both aspects were deficient in DP. Interestingly, control participants showed a homogeneous degree of correlation for successful trials during the experiment. In DP-participants, correlation levels between FFA-voxels were significantly lower and were less sustained during the experiment. In behavioral terms, DP-participants performed poorer and had longer reaction times in relation to DP-severity. Furthermore, correlation levels were negatively correlated with reaction times for the most demanding high load condition.Conclusion: We suggest that participants with DP fail to generate robust and maintained neural representations in the FFA during face encoding and maintenance, in line with poorer task performance and prolonged reaction times. In DP, alterations of neural coding in the FFA might therefore explain curtailing in working memory and contribute to impaired long-term memory and mental imagery.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kuo Liu ◽  
Chiu-Yueh Chun ◽  
Le-Si Wang ◽  
Chun-Chia Kung

In 2011, Brants, Wagemans, & Op de Beeck (JOCN 23:12, pp. 3949-3958) trained eight individuals to become Greeble experts, and found neuronal inversion effects [NIEs; i.e., higher Fusiform Face Area (FFA) activity for upright, rather than inverted Greebles]. These effects were also found for faces, both before and after training. By claiming to have replicated the seminal Greeble training study (i.e., Gauthier, Tarr, Anderson, Skudlarski, & Gore, 1999, Nat Neurosci, 2, 568-573), Brants et al. interpreted these results as participants viewing Greebles as faces throughout training, contrary to the original argument of subjects becoming Greeble experts only after training. However, such a claim presents two issues. First, the behavioral training results of Brants et al. did not replicate those of Gauthier et al (1999), raising concerns of whether the right training regime had been adopted. Second, both a literature review and meta-analysis of NIE in the FFA suggest its unreliability as an index of face(-like) processing. To empirically evaluate these issues, the present study compared two documented training paradigms (i.e., Gauthier & Tarr, 1997, Vision Res, 37, 1673-1682; and Gauthier, Williams, Tarr, & Tanaka, 1998, Vision Res, 38, 2401-2428) and explored their impact on the FFA. The results showed significant increases in the FFA for Greebles, and a clear neural "adaptation" (i.e., decreased activity for faces following Greebles, but not following non-face objects, in the FFA) both only in the Gauthier97 group, and only after training, reflecting clear modulation of expertise following "appropriate" training. In both groups, no clear NIE for faces nor Greebles were found. Collectively, these data invalidate the two assumptions behind the Brants et al. findings, and provide not only the updated support, but also the new evidence, for the perceptual expertise hypothesis of FFA.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e0256849
Author(s):  
Ellen M. Kok ◽  
Bettina Sorger ◽  
Koos van Geel ◽  
Andreas Gegenfurtner ◽  
Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer ◽  
...  

Radiologists can visually detect abnormalities on radiographs within 2s, a process that resembles holistic visual processing of faces. Interestingly, there is empirical evidence using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) for the involvement of the right fusiform face area (FFA) in visual-expertise tasks such as radiological image interpretation. The speed by which stimuli (e.g., faces, abnormalities) are recognized is an important characteristic of holistic processing. However, evidence for the involvement of the right FFA in holistic processing in radiology comes mostly from short or artificial tasks in which the quick, ‘holistic’ mode of diagnostic processing is not contrasted with the slower ‘search-to-find’ mode. In our fMRI study, we hypothesized that the right FFA responds selectively to the ‘holistic’ mode of diagnostic processing and less so to the ‘search-to-find’ mode. Eleven laypeople and 17 radiologists in training diagnosed 66 radiographs in 2s each (holistic mode) and subsequently checked their diagnosis in an extended (10-s) period (search-to-find mode). During data analysis, we first identified individual regions of interest (ROIs) for the right FFA using a localizer task. Then we employed ROI-based ANOVAs and obtained tentative support for the hypothesis that the right FFA shows more activation for radiologists in training versus laypeople, in particular in the holistic mode (i.e., during 2s trials), and less so in the search-to-find mode (i.e., during 10-s trials). No significant correlation was found between diagnostic performance (diagnostic accuracy) and brain-activation level within the right FFA for both, short-presentation and long-presentation diagnostic trials. Our results provide tentative evidence from a diagnostic-reasoning task that the FFA supports the holistic processing of visual stimuli in participants’ expertise domain.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerio Rubino

This report will revolve around a paper published in 2012 by Saygin, which combines diffusion and functionalimaging to prove that the functionally-defined fusiform face area can be identified by a characteristic pattern ofextrinsic connectivity. As the saying goes: “tell me who you hang out with and I will tell who you are”. First, Iwill briefly review some proposals about the relationship between connectivity and function to unravel therelevance of the study at issue. Then, I will touch some issues related to structural connectivity data analysis and how they have been overcome within a probabilistic framework. Next, I will survey experimentswhich built on the latter and to which Saygin’s added. In the following section, I will describe the methods andresults of Saygin’s article, whose limitations and implications will be then explored in the discussion


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather Kosakowski ◽  
Michael Cohen ◽  
Atsushi Takahashi ◽  
boris keil ◽  
Nancy Kanwisher ◽  
...  

Three of the most robust functional landmarks in the human brain are the selective responses to faces in the fusiform face area (FFA), scenes in the parahippocampal place area (PPA), and bodies in the extrastriate body area (EBA). Are the selective responses of these regions present early in development, or do they require many years to develop? Prior evidence leaves this question unresolved. We designed a new 32-channel infant MRI coil, and collected high-quality functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data from infants (2-9 months of age) while they viewed stimuli from four conditions – faces, bodies, objects, and scenes. We find that infants have face-, scene-, and body-selective responses specifically localized to the FFA, PPA, and EBA, respectively, powerfully constraining accounts of cortical development.


Cortex ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 131 ◽  
pp. 123-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie-Marie Rostalski ◽  
Catarina Amado ◽  
Gyula Kovács ◽  
Daniel Feuerriegel

Synthese ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Viola

Abstract In their attempt to connect the workings of the human mind with their neural realizers, cognitive neuroscientists often bracket out individual differences to build a single, abstract model that purportedly represents (almost) every human being’s brain. In this paper I first examine the rationale behind this model, which I call ‘Platonic Brain Model’. Then I argue that it is to be surpassed in favor of multiple models allowing for patterned inter-individual differences. I introduce the debate on legitimate (and illegitimate) ways of mapping neural structures and cognitive functions, endorsing a view according to which function-structure mapping is context-sensitive. Building on the discussion of the ongoing debate on the function(s) of the so-called Fusiform “Face” Area, I show the necessity of indexing function-structure mappings to some populations of subjects, clustered on the basis of factors such as their expertise in a given domain.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document