ArticlePloS one2018
Differences in neural responses to ipsilateral stimuli in wide-view fields between face- and house-selective areas.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Category-selective brain areas exhibit varying levels of neural activity to ipsilaterally presented stimuli. However, in face- and house-selective areas, the neural responses evoked by ipsilateral stimuli in the peripheral visual field remain unclear. In this study, we displayed face and house images using a wide-view visual presentation system while performing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The face-selective areas (fusiform face area (FFA) and occipital face area (OFA)) exhibited intense neural responses to ipsilaterally presented images, whereas the house-selective areas (parahippocampal place area (PPA) and transverse occipital sulcus (TOS)) exhibited substantially smaller and even negative neural responses to the ipsilaterally presented images. We also found that the category preferences of the contralateral and ipsilateral neural responses were similar. Interestingly, the face- and house-selective areas exhibited neural responses to ipsilateral images that were smaller than the responses to the contralateral images. Multi-voxel pattern analysis (MVPA) was implemented to evaluate the difference between the contralateral and ipsilateral responses. The classification accuracies were much greater than those expected by chance. The classification accuracies in the FFA were smaller than those in the PPA and TOS. The closer eccentricities elicited greater classification accuracies in the PPA and TOS. We propose that these ipsilateral neural responses might be interpreted by interhemispheric communication through intrahemispheric connectivity of white matter connection and interhemispheric connectivity via the corpus callosum and occipital white matter connection. Furthermore, the PPA and TOS likely have weaker interhemispheric communication than the FFA and OFA, particularly in the peripheral visual field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.