↓ Skip to main content

Left occipitotemporal cortex contributes to the discrimination of tool-associated hand actions: fMRI and TMS evidence

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
80 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
Left occipitotemporal cortex contributes to the discrimination of tool-associated hand actions: fMRI and TMS evidence
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00591
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francesca Perini, Alfonso Caramazza, Marius V. Peelen

Abstract

Functional neuroimaging studies have implicated the left lateral occipitotemporal cortex (LOTC) in both tool and hand perception but the functional role of this region is not fully known. Here, by using a task manipulation, we tested whether tool-/hand-selective LOTC contributes to the discrimination of tool-associated hand actions. Participants viewed briefly presented pictures of kitchen and garage tools while they performed one of two tasks: in the action task, they judged whether the tool is associated with a hand rotation action (e.g., screwdriver) or a hand squeeze action (e.g., garlic press), while in the location task they judged whether the tool is typically found in the kitchen (e.g., garlic press) or in the garage (e.g., screwdriver). Both tasks were performed on the same stimulus set and were matched for difficulty. Contrasting fMRI responses between these tasks showed stronger activity during the action task than the location task in both tool- and hand-selective LOTC regions, which closely overlapped. No differences were found in nearby object- and motion-selective control regions. Importantly, these findings were confirmed by a TMS study, which showed that effective TMS over the tool-/hand-selective LOTC region significantly slowed responses for tool action discriminations relative to tool location discriminations, with no such difference during sham TMS. We conclude that left LOTC contributes to the discrimination of tool-associated hand actions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 78 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 18%
Student > Master 10 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 11%
Lecturer 6 8%
Other 15 19%
Unknown 8 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 40 50%
Neuroscience 13 16%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Environmental Science 1 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 19 24%
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 17 July 2014.
All research outputs
#17,723,634
of 22,758,963 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,703
of 7,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,278
of 230,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#205
of 248 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,963 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 230,115 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 248 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.