ArticleCognition2025
Neural specialization for 'visual' concepts emerges in the absence of vision.
Article in Cognition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The 'different-body/different-concepts hypothesis' central to some embodiment theories proposes that the sensory capacities of our bodies shape the cognitive and neural basis of our concepts. We tested this hypothesis by comparing behavioral semantic similarity judgments and neural signatures (fMRI) of 'visual' categories ('living things,' or animals, e.g., tiger, and light events, e.g., sparkle) across congenitally blind (n = 21) and sighted (n = 22) adults. Words referring to 'visual' entities/nouns and events/verbs (animals and light events) were compared to less vision-dependent categories from the same grammatical class (animal vs. place nouns, light vs. sound, mouth, and hand verbs). Within-category semantic similarity judgments about animals (e.g., sparrow vs. finch) were partially different across groups, consistent with the idea that sighted people rely on visually learned information to make such judgments about animals. However, robust neural specialization for living things in temporoparietal semantic networks, including in the precuneus, was observed in blind and sighted people alike. For light events, which are directly accessible only through vision, behavioral judgments were indistinguishable across groups. Neural responses to light events were also similar across groups: in both blind and sighted people, the left middle temporal gyrus (LMTG+) responded more to event concepts, including light events, compared to entity concepts. Multivariate patterns of neural activity in LMTG+ distinguished among different event types, including light events vs. other event types. In sum, we find that neural signatures of concepts previously attributed to visual experience do not require vision. Across a wide range of semantic types, conceptual representations develop independent of sensory experience.
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.