Bildbenennung Wortgenerierung(z.B. Nennen Sie m ö glichst viele Tiere!) Wortlesen (HUND)
description
Transcript of Bildbenennung Wortgenerierung(z.B. Nennen Sie m ö glichst viele Tiere!) Wortlesen (HUND)
Bildbenennung
Wortgenerierung (z.B. Nennen Sie möglichst viele Tiere!)
Wortlesen (HUND)
Pseudowortlesen (HUNG)
Analyse von 82 Hirnaktivierungsxperimenten mit vier verschiedenenWortproduktionsaufgaben:
Talairach & Tournoux (1988) Lateral and medial view of reference brain
Reported at least onceReported at least once
Estimate of probability of overlap under the assumption of a random distribution of activated regions
number of regions: 110
mean number of activated regions: r
chance probability for a region to be reportedas activated in a single experiment (p1): r/110
chance probability for a region to be reported as activated in n1 out of n experiments:
21 n1
n1
21)p(1p!n!n
n!p (with n1 + n2 = n)
Reliability criterion: p < 0.1 cut-off point in binomial distribution
Example region 1
Number of experiments: 82
Mean number of reported regions: 12.4
Reliably activated: 12 or more experiments
Reliably not activated: 4 or less experiments
Example region 2
Number of experiments: 23
Mean number of reported regions: 10.4
Reliably activated: 5 or more experiments
Reliably not activated: -
Zuverlässig aktivierte (rot) und nicht aktivierte (blau) Hirngebiete (basierend auf allen 82 Studien)
TASK ANALYSIS
Many tasks were not just word production tasks; they involved other operations as well.
For instance, when you name the picture of a horse, you not only produce the word 'horse', but you also look at the picture and recognize it. Such additional 'lead-in' operations involve the activation of additional brain regions. These should be filtered out.
That requires a systematic task analysis, a distinction between 'lead-in' and 'core' operations of word production.
Responses during Verb Generation Task
BANANATROUSERSCHAIRGLASSESTRUMPETPENCILBUTTONBIRDEARDOOR
peel, slip on, eat up, plantput on, wash, mend, buy, warmsit, build, nail, sell, work, learnclean, put on, step on, buy, seeblow, make music, put away, hear, playsharpen, break, put away, drawtear off, close, openfly, eat up, singhear, pinchopen, close, kick against
Konzeptuelle Vorbereitung
lexikalische Selektion
lexikalisches Konzept
Lemma
Wortformzugriff
Wortform
Syllabifizierung
phonologisches Wort
phonetische Enkodierung
abstraktes Motorprogramm
Artikulation
gesprochenes Wort
visuelle Objekt-erkennung
Einleitungsprozesse KernprozesseAufgabe
Worterkennung Objektvorstellung Gedächtnis etc.
visuelle Worterkennung
Graphem/PhonemKonversion
Bildbenennung
Wortgenerierung
Wortlesen
Pseudowortlesen
Selb
stmo
nito
ring
aussprechen vs. Wort “denken”
Bildbenennung
Wortgenerierung
Bildbenennung (grün), Wortgenerierung (blau), gemeinsame Gebiete (rot)
Gemeinsame Aktivierungsgebiete von Bildbenennung und Wortgenerierung
Konzeptuelle Vorbereitung
lexikalische Selektion
lexikalisches Konzept
Lemma
Wortformzugriff
Wortform
Syllabifizierung
phonologisches Wort
phonetische Enkodierung
abstraktes Motorprogramm
Artikulation
gesprochenes Wort
visuelle Objekt-erkennung
Einleitungsprozesse KernprozesseAufgabe
Worterkennung Objektvorstellung Gedächtnis etc.
visuelle Worterkennung
Graphem/PhonemKonversion
Bildbenennung
Wortgenerierung
Wortlesen
Pseudowortlesen
Selb
stmo
nito
ring
aussprechen vs. Wort “denken”
Konzeptuelle Vorbereitung
lexikalische Selektion
lexikalisches Konzept
Lemma
Wortformzugriff
Wortform
Syllabifizierung
phonologisches Wort
phonetische Enkodierung
abstraktes Motorprogramm
Artikulation
gesprochenes Wort
visuelle Objekt-erkennung
Einleitungsprozesse KernprozesseAufgabe
Worterkennung Objektvorstellung Gedächtnis etc.
visuelle Worterkennung
Graphem/PhonemKonversion
Bildbenennung
Wortgenerierung
Wortlesen
Pseudowortlesen
Selb
stmo
nito
ring
aussprechen vs. Wort “denken”
Gemeinsame Aktivierungsgebiete von Bildbenennung, Wortgenerierung und Wortlesen
Konzeptuelle Vorbereitung
lexikalische Selektion
lexikalisches Konzept
Lemma
Wortformzugriff
Wortform
Syllabifizierung
phonologisches Wort
phonetische Enkodierung
abstraktes Motorprogramm
Artikulation
gesprochenes Wort
visuelle Objekt-erkennung
Einleitungsprozesse KernprozesseAufgabe
Worterkennung Objektvorstellung Gedächtnis etc.
visuelle Worterkennung
Graphem/PhonemKonversion
Bildbenennung
Wortgenerierung
Wortlesen
Pseudowortlesen
Selb
stmo
nito
ring
aussprechen vs. Wort “denken”
Gemeinsame Aktivierungsgebiete aller Aufgaben
Aussprechen im Vergleich zu Wort “denken”
Schematische Darstellung des Ergebnisses der Meta-Analyse von 82 Hirnaktivierungsstudien
Indefrey, P. and Levelt, W.J.M. (2004) Cognition
The cognitive architecture of listening to language
speech signal
interpretation
decoding
segmenting
speech code
phonemes, syllables
phonological processing
word recognition
syntactic analysis
thematic analysis
integration with other knowledge sources
Tekst Sereno
Speech signal
Then once you have examined the city you can get a uh nice contrast to the surrounding country side - uh a very unique country side which contrasts the distinction between the the mountains to the uh low land of the coastal regions where there is a lot more uh fishing.
snelheid proposities (rate of propositions)10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
seconds
snelheid lexical access (rate of words)
snelheid klanken (rate of phonemes)
mixing van alle vier
speech signal
rate of propositions
rate of words
rate of phonemes
Reversed speech versus silence
Word lists versus silence
Study Stimulus #
Belin 1998 200ms frequency transition, 60/min 1
Belin 1998 40ms frequency transition, 60/min 2
Belin 1999 synthetic diphthong, 6/min 3
Binder 2000 tones, different frequencies, 90/min 4
Bookheimer 1998 pseudowords, 9/min 5
Celsis 1999 syllables, 180/min 6
Celsis 1999 tones, 500 + 700Hz, 180/min 7
di Salle 2001 tones, 1000Hz, 6/min 8
Engelien 1995 environmental sounds, 10/min 9
Fiez 1996 pseudowords, 60/min 10
Fiez 1996 words, 60/min 11
Giraud 2000 vowels vs. expecting vowels, 120/min 12
Holcomb 1998 tones, 1500Hz + lower tones, 30/min 13
Jäncke 1999 tones, 1000Hz, 60/min 14
Lockwood 1999 tones, 500 + 4000Hz, 60/min 15
Mellet 1996 words, 30/min 16
Mirz 1999 music 17
Mirz 1999 sentences 18
Study Stimulus #
Mirz 1999 tones, 1000Hz 19
Mirz 1999 tones, 1000 + 4000Hz 20
Mirz 1999 words 21
Müller 1997 sentences, 12/min 22
Petersen 1988 words, 60/min 23
Price 1996 words, 40/min 24
Price 1996 words, different rates 25
Suzuki 2002a words, 60/min 26
Suzuki 2002b tones, 1000Hz, 60/min 27
Thivard 2000tones with spectral maxima, 60/min
28
Warburton 1996 words, 4/min 29
Wise 1991 pseudowords, 40 or 60/min 30
Wong 1999 reversed sentences, 30/min 31
Wong 1999 sentences, 30/min 32
Wong 1999 words, 30/min 33
Wong 2002 reversed words, 15/min 34
Wong 2002 sentences, 12/min 35
Wong 2002 words, 15/min 36
Indefrey & Cutler, 2004
Studies comparing auditory stimuli to silent baseline conditions
Study Stimulus vs. control stimulus #
Benson 2001 CVC > CV > V 1
Binder 1996 words vs. tones 2
Binder 2000 pseudo vs. tones 3
Binder 2000 reversed words vs. tones 4
Binder 2000 words vs. tones 5
Giraud 2000 amplitude modulated noise vs. noise 6
Giraud 2000 sentences vs. vowels 7
Giraud 2000 words vs. vowels 8
Hall 2002 frequency modulated vs. static tone 9
Hall 2002 harmonic vs. single tone 10
Jäncke 2002 syllables vs. 350 ms white noise bursts 11
Jäncke 2002 syllables vs. steady state portion of vowel 12
Jäncke 2002 syllables vs. tones 13
Müller 2002 90% 1000Hz + 10% 500Hz vs. 1000Hz 14
Mummery 1999 words vs. signal correlated noise 15
Price 1996 words vs. reversed words 16
Schlosser 1998 sentences vs. unknown language 17
Scott 2000 sentences vs. rotated sentences 18
Thivard 2000 frequency transition vs. stationary tone 19
Indefrey & Cutler, 2004
Studies comparing auditory stimuli to simpler auditory stimuli
Talairach & Tournoux (1988) Lateral and medial view of reference brain
Silent control
Silent control
Silent control
Silent control
Silent control
Silent control
Silent control
Silent control
Silent control
Silent control
Listening to speech without an additional task induces extensive bilateral temporal activation but no reliable activation of Broca’s area.
Summary
With increasing linguistic complexity of stimuli, the distance of activation maxima from the primary auditory cortex increases; particularly in the left hemisphere.
It seems to be the highest linguistic processing level that leads to the most significant activation difference compared to a silent control.
Summary
The left hemisphere shows a clearer stimulus-specific differentiation of activation maxima.
Areas that seem to be especially related to (post-) lexical and sentence level processing can be identified.
Summary
bilateral posterior STG: phonology
left posterior STS: lexical phonology
left anterior STS: possibly lexical and sentential prosody, possibly lexical and sentential meaning
Summary
Hagoort & Indefrey, in press
Neuroimaging studies on sentence processing
Hagoort & Indefrey, in press
Haller, Klarhöfer, Radue, Schwarzbach, & Indefrey (2007) Eur. J. Neuroscience
Stimuli
Condition Stimulus Task Graphemic /
phonological
Lexical
semantic Syntactic
SIMPLE xxx xxxx bright xx
xx xxx dark xxxxxx xx
Opposite meaning ?
YES or NO + +
MEDIUM The room is bright
The room is green
Opposite meaning ?
YES or NO ++ ++ +
COMPLEX The dog chases the cat in the garden
In the garden, the dog chases the cat
Same meaning?
YES or NO +++ +++ ++
Haller, Klarhöfer, Radue, Schwarzbach, & Indefrey (2007) Eur. J. Neuroscience
Bookheimer (2002), Fig. 2
Haller, Klarhöfer, Radue, Schwarzbach, & Indefrey (2007) Eur. J. Neuroscience
wegstossen-Animation(1)
wegstossen-Animation(2)
Condition1: Sentences
Der rote Kreis stößt die grüne Ellipse weg.
(The red circle pushes the green ellipse away.)
Condition 2: Noun phrases
roter Kreis, grüne Ellipse, wegstoßen
(red circle, green ellipse, push away)
Condition 3: Single words
Kreis, rot, Ellipse, grün, wegstoßen
(circle, red, ellipse, green, push away)
All conditions at slow (6/min) and fast (8/min) rate.
Sentences vs. Single Words
Activation maximum at -60,14,12
Indefrey et al. (2004) Brain & Language
Activation maximum at -54,6,10
Indefrey et al. (2001) PNAS
S and NP production vs. control (W)
Indefrey, Hellwig, Herzog, Seitz & Hagoort (2004) Brain & Language
Conclusions (1)
The left posterior IFG and the left posterior temporal lobe subserve syntactic comprehension.
Neural activation in syntactic comprehension depends on the need for syntactic analysis.
The two areas do not subserve the same function, because the temporal area does not seem to respond to syntactic errors and is not found in syntactic production.
Aufgabe vom 14.5.10
Finden Sie eine neue Studie (ab 2006) in der mit FMRI, PET, oder NIRS entweder Wortproduktion oder Wortverstehen oder Satzverstehen untersucht wurde.
Vergleichen Sie die Ergebnisse mit der entsprechenden Meta-analyse.
Wodurch könnten Unterschiede zustande gekommen sein?
73