The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Natural Scene Categories Revealed in Distributed Patterns of Activity in the Human Brain
Open accessAbstract
Human subjects are extremely efficient at categorizing natural scenes, despite the fact that different classes of natural scenes often share similar image statistics. Thus far, however, it is unknown where and how complex natural scene categories are encoded and discriminated in the brain. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and distributed pattern analysis to ask what regions of the brain can differentiate natural scene categories (such as forests vs mountains vs beaches). Using completely different exemplars of six natural scene categories for training and testing ensured that the classification algorithm was learning patterns associated with the category in general and not specific exemplars. We found that area V1, the parahippocampal place area (PPA), retrosplenial cortex (RSC), and lateral occipital complex (LOC) all contain information that distinguishes among natural scene categories. More importantly, correlations with human behavioral experiments suggest that the information present in the PPA, RSC, and LOC is likely to contribute to natural scene categorization by humans. Specifically, error patterns of predictions based on fMRI signals in these areas were significantly correlated with the behavioral errors of the subjects. Furthermore, both behavioral categorization performance and predictions from PPA exhibited a significant decrease in accuracy when scenes were presented up-down inverted. Together these results suggest that a network of regions, including the PPA, RSC, and LOC, contribute to the human ability to categorize natural scenes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex
Hubel, D. H., & Wiesel, T. N. (1962) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1962.sp006837 · Cited by 13,680
Jenkinson, M., Bannister, P., Brady, M., & Smith, S. (2002) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1006/nimg.2002.1132 · Cited by 11,888
AFNI: Software for analysis and visualization of functional magnetic resonance neuroimages
Cox, R. W. (1996) · Computers and Biomedical Research · doi:10.1006/cbmr.1996.0014 · Cited by 10,913
The fusiform face area: a module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception
Kanwisher, N., McDermott, J., & Chun, M. M. (1997) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.17-11-04302.1997 · Cited by 7,738
Speed of processing in the human visual system
Thorpe, S., Fize, D., & Marlot, C. (1996) · Nature · doi:10.1038/381520a0 · Cited by 3,538
Decoding the visual and subjective contents of the human brain
Kamitani, Y., & Tong, F. (2005) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1444 · Cited by 1,829
Bar, M. (2004) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1476 · Cited by 1,613
Expertise for cars and birds recruits brain areas involved in face recognition
Gauthier, I., Skudlarski, P., Gore, J. C., & Anderson, A. W. (2000) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/72140 · Cited by 1,418 · cited 1×
“, 1997), the FFA has also been reported to be activated for other kinds of objects (GrillSpector et al., 1999; Gauthier et al., 2000; Tarr and Gauthier, 2000; Haxby et al., 2001).”
BackgroundBeyond the Edges of a View: Boundary Extension in Human Scene-Selective Visual Cortex
Park, S., Intraub, H., Yi, D.-J., Widders, D., & Chun, M. M. (2007) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2007.04.006 · Cited by 144
Cited by
Decoding subject-driven cognitive states with whole-brain connectivity patterns
Shirer, W. R., Ryali, S., Rykhlevskaia, E., Menon, V., & Greicius, M. D. (2012) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhr099 · Cited by 1,843
A new neural framework for visuospatial processing
Kravitz, D. J., Saleem, K. S., Baker, C. I., & Mishkin, M. (2011) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3008 · Cited by 1,325
Cognition does not affect perception: Evaluating the evidence for “top-down” effects
Firestone, C., & Scholl, B. J. (2016) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x15000965 · Cited by 1,200
Space in the brain: How the hippocampal formation supports spatial cognition
Hartley, T., Lever, C., Burgess, N., & O'Keefe, J. (2014) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0510 · Cited by 495
Distributed Representations in Memory: Insights from Functional Brain Imaging
Rissman, J., & Wagner, A. D. (2012) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100344 · Cited by 299
Metadata
- Authors
- Walther, D. B., Caddigan, E., Fei-Fei, L., & Beck, D. M.
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 2009-08-26
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 34
- Pages
- 10573-10581
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- OpenAlex
- W2144714250
- Cited by
- 342
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 8.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Natural Scene Categories Revealed in Distributed Patterns of Activity in the Human Brain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1523/jneurosci.0559-09.2009
- The paper
- Walther, D. B., Caddigan, E., Fei-Fei, L., & Beck, D. M. (2009). Natural Scene Categories Revealed in Distributed Patterns of Activity in the Human Brain. The Journal of Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0559-09.2009
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.