Cited by 125Tactile and Sensory InteractionsMultisensory perception and integrationVisual perception and processing mechanisms

Cortical activity during tactile exploration of objects in blind and sighted humans

Amedi, Amir, Raz, Noa, Azulay, Haim, Malach, Rafael, Zohary, Ehud·2010·Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience

Abstract

PURPOSE: Recent studies show evidence of multisensory representation in the functionally normal visual cortex, but this idea remains controversial. Occipital cortex activation is often claimed to be a reflection of mental visual imagery processes triggered by other modalities. However, if the occipital cortex is genuinely active during touch, this might be the basis for the massive cross-modal plasticity observed in the congenitally blind. METHODS: To address these issues, we used fMRI to compare patterns of activation evoked by a tactile object recognition (TOR) task (right or left hand) in 8 sighted and 8 congenitally blind subjects, with several other control tasks. RESULTS: TOR robustly activated object selective regions in the lateral occipital complex (LOC/LOtv) in the blind (similar to the patterns of activation found in the sighted), indicating that object identification per se (i.e. in the absence of visual imagery) is sufficient to evoke responses in the LOC/LOtv. Importantly, there was negligible occipital activation for hand movements (imitating object palpations) in the occipital cortex, in both groups. Moreover, in both groups, TOR activation in the LOC/LOtv was bilateral, regardless of the palpating hand (similar to the lack of strong visual field preference in the LOC/LOtv for viewed objects). Finally, the most prominent enhancement in TOR activation in the congenitally blind (compared to their sighted peers) was found in the posterior occipital cortex. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that visual imagery is not an obligatory condition for object activation in visual cortex. It also demonstrates the massive plasticity in visual cortex of the blind for tactile object recognition that involves both the ventral and dorsal occipital areas, probably to support the high demand for this function in the blind.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3233/rnn-2010-0503

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Amedi, A., Raz, N., Azulay, H., Malach, R., & Zohary, E.
Affiliations
  • Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
  • Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
Corresponding author
Amedi, Amir
Venue
Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience
Published
2010-04
Volume
28
Issue
2
Pages
143-156
ISSN
  • 0922-6028 (ISSN-L)
  • 1878-3627
OpenAlex
W2159773361
Cited by
125
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 9
FWCI
7.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
tactile object recognition, congenital blindness, cross-modal plasticity, lateral occipital complex, visual cortex, multisensory representation, visual imagery, bilateral activation
MeSH terms
Adult, Afferent Pathways, Analysis of Variance, Blindness, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Female, Hand, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Functional Laterality, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Oxygen, Physical Stimulation, Reaction Time, Touch, Recognition, Psychology, Young Adult

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