↓ Skip to main content

Brain networks involved in haptic and visual identification of facial expressions of emotion: An fMRI study

Overview of attention for article published in NeuroImage, September 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
98 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
164 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Brain networks involved in haptic and visual identification of facial expressions of emotion: An fMRI study
Published in
NeuroImage, September 2009
DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.09.014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ryo Kitada, Ingrid S. Johnsrude, Takanori Kochiyama, Susan J. Lederman

Abstract

Previous neurophysiological and neuroimaging studies have shown that a cortical network involving the inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), inferior parietal lobe (IPL) and cortical areas in and around the posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS) region is employed in action understanding by vision and audition. However, the brain regions that are involved in action understanding by touch are unknown. Lederman et al. (2007) recently demonstrated that humans can haptically recognize facial expressions of emotion (FEE) surprisingly well. Here, we report a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study in which we test the hypothesis that the IFG, IPL and pSTS regions are involved in haptic, as well as visual, FEE identification. Twenty subjects haptically or visually identified facemasks with three different FEEs (disgust, neutral and happiness) and casts of shoes (shoes) of three different types. The left posterior middle temporal gyrus, IPL, IFG and bilateral precentral gyrus were activated by FEE identification relative to that of shoes, regardless of sensory modality. By contrast, an inferomedial part of the left superior parietal lobule was activated by haptic, but not visual, FEE identification. Other brain regions, including the lingual gyrus and superior frontal gyrus, were activated by visual identification of FEEs, relative to haptic identification of FEEs. These results suggest that haptic and visual FEE identification rely on distinct but overlapping neural substrates including the IFG, IPL and pSTS region.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 2 1%
France 2 1%
United States 2 1%
Cuba 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 154 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 23%
Researcher 28 17%
Student > Master 17 10%
Professor 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Other 36 22%
Unknown 16 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 69 42%
Neuroscience 22 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 7%
Engineering 10 6%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 19 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 August 2012.
All research outputs
#20,653,708
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from NeuroImage
#10,823
of 12,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,524
of 106,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from NeuroImage
#70
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,204 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 106,309 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.