Elsevier

NeuroImage

Volume 5, Issue 3, April 1997, Pages 229-239
NeuroImage

Regular Article
Cognitive Subtractions May Not Add Up: The Interaction between Semantic Processing and Response Mode

https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.1997.0257Get rights and content

Abstract

Determining the areas of brain activity associated with cognitive processing has typically relied on the use of a subtraction paradigm, which is based on the premise that the neural processes underlying behavior are additive. If the additivity assumption is valid then brain regions associated with a semantic processing task should be the same regardless of how participants make a response. To investigate this proposition, participants underwent six PET scans, in which they made semantic or letter word judgments, responding “yes” or “no” in three different modes: mouse-clicking, spoken response, or silent thought. Analyses showed an increase in regional cerebral blood flow associated with semantic processing in the left inferior frontal cortex, anterior cingulate, and right cerebellum for all three response conditions. However, there was a significant interaction: the greatest increase was observed in the mouse-click condition and the weakest change seen with silent thought. Moreover, other areas of the brain were uniquely activated for each response mode. The results indicate that different areas of the brain were recruited for semantic processing depending on how participants had to organize their responses. Implications for the additivity assumption and methods of analysis to be used in conjunction with the subtraction technique are discussed.

References (28)

  • D.J. Felleman et al.

    Distributed hierarchical processing in the primate cerebral cortex

    Cereb. Cortex

    (1991)
  • K.J. Friston et al.

    Statistical parametric maps in functional imaging: A general linear approach

    Hum. Brain Map.

    (1995)
  • P. Good

    Permutation Tests

    (1994)
  • Cited by (78)

    • Revealing the body in the brain: An ERP method to examine sensorimotor activity during visual perception of body-related information

      2020, Cortex
      Citation Excerpt :

      Subtracting the output of these tasks (e.g., reaction time) informs about the added cognitive costs; each task is thought to reflect a part of a major cognitive process (much like those differences in the mental operations of Donders’ experiments; Donders, 1868). Nevertheless, current postulates criticize this linear approach because it seems to neglect interactions between cognitive/neural processes (Friston et al., 1996; Jennings, McIntosh, Kapur, Tulving, & Houle, 1997; Price & Friston, 1997; Vidal, Burle, Grapperon, & Hasbroucq, 2011). A subtraction closer to the one proposed here is that one found in studies examining multisensory integration whereby different stimuli are presented through one, two or more sensory modalities in a de/synchronised manner.

    • The involvement of subcortical grey matter in verbal semantic comprehension: A systematic review and meta-analysis of fMRI and PET studies

      2019, Journal of Neurolinguistics
      Citation Excerpt :

      One study described both word and sentence comprehension (McAvoy et al., 2016). Further, 23 studies (25 experiments) on word level comprehension were included in the meta-analysis (Categorization: Chee, O'Craven, Bergida, Rosen, & Savoy, 1999; Gold & Buckner, 2002; Harris et al., 2006; Jennings, McIntosh, Kapur, Tulving, & Houle, 1997; Kellenbach, Brett, & Patterson, 2001; Lepage, Habib, Cormier, Houle, & McIntosh, 2000; Mandzia, Black, McAndrews, Grady, & Graham, 2004; Noppeney & Price, 2002; Pilgrim, Fadili, Fletcher, & Tyler, 2002; Roskies, Fiez, Balota, Raichle, & Petersen, 2001; Rossion et al., 2000; Tieleman et al., 2005; Welker, De Jesus, Watson, Machulda, & Jack, 2012; Wirth et al., 2011 – Compositional association: Assaf et al., 2006; Fenker et al., 2010; Martins, Simard, & Monchi, 2014; McDermott, Petersen, Watson, & Ojemann, 2003; Mummery, Patterson, Hodges, & Price, 1998; Seghier & Price, 2013; Simard, Monetta, Nagano-Saito, & Monchi, 2013; Weber, Lau, Stillerman, & Kuperberg, 2016; Whatmough, Verret, Fung, & Chertkow, 2004). Due to the low number of studies and to the methodological heterogeneity of comprehension tasks at sentence level, no meta-analysis could be performed.

    • The lexical processing of abstract and concrete nouns

      2009, Brain Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      Therefore, results differ even when the same type of task is used, possibly depending on the stimuli features, such as the degree of imageability: although concrete material is mostly imageable, abstract words present a high degree of variability within this dimension (Paivio, 1971). Response type can also have a relevant effect in semantic memory tasks with a significant interaction between response type and brain regional activation (Jennings et al., 1997). To summarize, most (but not all) neuroimaging studies suggest a bilateral representation for concrete items, essentially involving several structures almost invariably including the fusiform gyrus, while abstract word representation is less defined, resulting either in a left, right, or bilateral activation.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text