Neural substrates of animal mental imagery: calcarine sulcus and dorsal pathway involvement—an fMRI study
Abstract
Neural response was measured using fMRI in six healthy volunteers, performing a mental imagery task, using verbal cues exclusively. They listened to a list of animal names from which to generate a mental image, and listened passively to a list of abstract words. They were tested twice, using the same protocol. SPM99-processed results showed for both sessions activation in the calcarine sulcus and local activation foci, mainly in the occipito-parietal region. Other studies involving figurative mental imagery using verbal cues, have shown activation in the occipito-temporal area, but none in the calcarine sulcus or in the dorsal route. We account for the discrepancies relative to previous mental imagery studies using verbal cues, in terms of differences in the experimental conditions. In our opinion, restricting the stimuli to a single semantic category (animals) and increasing the time dedicated to the production of MI, may have enhanced the components of the pictures. This mental imagery generation protocol shows the importance of the design of experimental tasks on anatomo-functional responses.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Early visual cortices are activated during visual imagery in the absence of visual stimulation, with this early sensory activation sustained by recurrent interactions with higher-level processing areas.
“Models of visual processing provide a useful analogy here because it has been shown that early visual cortices (e.g. the calcarine cortex and the lateral occipital cortex) are activated during visual imagery in the absence of visual stimulation (Klein et al., 2000; Lambert et al., 2002; Stokes et al., 2009, 2011) with this early sensory activation sustained by recurrent interactions with higher”
From A review and synthesis of the first 20years of PET and fMRI studies of heard speech, spoken language and reading (2012) · cites this paper as Lambert et al., 2002
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 30 · Cited by 50
- Authors
- Lambert, S., Sampaio, E., Scheiber, C., & Mauss, Y.
- Affiliations
- Lyon 1 Université (FR)
- Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers (FR)
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Sampaio, Eliana
- ORCID
- Scheiber, Christian
- Venue
- Brain Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2002-01
- Volume
- 924
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 176-183
- ISSN
- 0006-8993 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2034849736
- Cited by
- 50
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 1.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Brain Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
- Keywords
- mental imagery, animal imagery, calcarine sulcus, dorsal visual pathway, verbal cues, semantic categories, neural correlates
- MeSH terms
- Acoustic Stimulation, Adult, Animals, Brain Mapping, Female, Humans, Imagination, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neural Pathways, Visual Cortex
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review