Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34727232›Full record

ArticleBrain structure & function2022

Direct comparison of contralateral bias and face/scene selectivity in human occipitotemporal cortex.

Edward H Silson, Iris I A Groen, Chris I Baker

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain structure & function, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. The Emergence of Topography and Hemispheric Lateralization in High-Level Vision.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Social brain responses to natural scene images of social interactions.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Individual gaze shapes diverging neural representations.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Edward H Silson *Section on Learning and Plasticity, Laboratory of Brain and Cognition, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892-1366, USA. Ed.Silson@ed.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6149-7423
Iris I A Groen *Section on Learning and Plasticity, Laboratory of Brain and Cognition, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892-1366, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5536-6128
Chris I BakerSection on Learning and Plasticity, Laboratory of Brain and Cognition, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892-1366, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6861-8964
National Institute of Mental Health · USLanguage Science (South Korea) · KR

Funding

Object, face, body and scene representations in the human brainZIAMH002909 · NIMH · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH · PI BAKER, CHRIS · 2009 to 2025
$25.5M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA MH002909NIMH NIH HHS ZIAMH002909
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human visual cortex is organised broadly according to two major principles: retinotopy (the spatial mapping of the retina in cortex) and category-selectivity (preferential responses to specific categories of stimuli). Historically, these principles were considered anatomically separate, with retinotopy restricted to the occipital cortex and category-selectivity emerging in the lateral-occipital and ventral-temporal cortex. However, recent studies show that category-selective regions exhibit systematic retinotopic biases, for example exhibiting stronger activation for stimuli presented in the contra- compared to the ipsilateral visual field. It is unclear, however, whether responses within category-selective regions are more strongly driven by retinotopic location or by category preference, and if there are systematic differences between category-selective regions in the relative strengths of these preferences. Here, we directly compare contralateral and category preferences by measuring fMRI responses to scene and face stimuli presented in the left or right visual field and computing two bias indices: a contralateral bias (response to the contralateral minus ipsilateral visual field) and a face/scene bias (preferred response to scenes compared to faces, or vice versa). We compare these biases within and between scene- and face-selective regions and across the lateral and ventral surfaces of the visual cortex more broadly. We find an interaction between surface and bias: lateral surface regions show a stronger contralateral than face/scene bias, whilst ventral surface regions show the opposite. These effects are robust across and within subjects, and appear to reflect large-scale, smoothly varying gradients. Together, these findings support distinct functional roles for the lateral and ventral visual cortex in terms of the relative importance of the spatial location of stimuli during visual information processing.

Indexed as

Pattern Recognition, VisualVisual CortexBiasBrain MappingHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingOccipital LobePhotic StimulationTemporal LobeContralateral biasFace-selectivityFFAfMRIPPARetinotopyScene-selectivity

Identifiers

PMID34727232
PMCPMC9046350
OpenAlexW3209724974

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.