Category-specific naming and modality-specific imagery

Some attempts to explain category-specific disorders have stressed how different modality knowledge bases (i.e., visual knowledge vs motoric/functional knowledge) may underlie the distinction between living and nonliving things. This study examined 60 normal subjects for the relationship between picture naming in four subcategories (animals, fruit/vegetables, praxic and nonpraxic objects) and imagery vividness in seven modalities. Participants made more nonliving than living errors; and females made more nonliving errors than males. There was a significant correlation between naming of animals and fruits/vegetables and visual imagery vividness; however, this association was also significant for praxic and nonpraxic object naming. There was no evidence of associations between kinesthetic imagery and praxic object naming or gustatory/olfactory imagery and fruit/vegetable naming. These findings accord with the notion of a general association between visual imagery and picture naming, but provide no support for more specific links between modality-specific imagery vividness and naming in different categories.     

Left anterior lobectomy and category-specific naming

Damasio and colleagues (1996) have proposed that the left anterior temporal region supports knowledge pertaining to living objects, whereas more posterior temporal regions play a critical role in naming nonliving things. Accordingly, one might expect that left-sided anterior temporal lobectomy should have a more profound effect on the naming of living as opposed to nonliving things. As part of a multicenter collaborative project, seventy-nine patients (all left-hemisphere speech dominant) were tested pre- and post-left-temporal lobectomy on a task that required naming of living and nonliving items equated for name frequency, familiarity, and visual complexity. Consistent with the proposals of Damasio et al. (1996), left temporal lobectomy impaired naming ability, particularly for living things. When individual outcomes were considered, twice as many patients showed a relative decline in naming living as opposed to nonliving things.     

Sources of error in picture naming under time pressure

We used a deadline procedure to investigate how time pressure may influence the processes involved in picture naming. The deadline exaggerated errors found under naming without deadline. There were also category differences in performance between living and nonliving things and, in particular, for animals versus fruit and vegetables. The majority of errors were visuallyand semantically related to the target (e. celery-asparagus), and there was a greater proportion of these errors made to living things. Importantly, there were also more visual-semantic errors to animals than to fruit and vegetables. In addition, there were a smaller number of pure semantic errors (e.g., nut-bolt), which were made predominantly to nonliving things. The different kinds of error were correlated with different variables. Overall, visual-semantic errors were associated with visual complexity and visual similarity, whereas pure semantic errors were associated with imageability and age of acquisition. However, for animals, visual-semantic errors were associated with visual complexity, whereas for fruit and vegetables they were associated with visual similarity. We discuss these findings in terms of theories of category-specific semantic impairment and models of picture naming.     

An attenuation of the 'normal' category effect in patients with Alzheimer's disease: a review and bootstrap analysis

There is a consensus that Alzheimer's disease (AD) impairs semantic information, with one of the first markers being anomia i.e. an impaired ability to name items. Doubts remain, however, about whether this naming impairment differentially affects items from the living and nonliving knowledge domains. Most studies have reported an impairment for naming living things (e.g. animals or plants), a minority have found an impairment for nonliving things (e.g. tools or vehicles), and some have found no category-specific effect. A survey of the literature reveals that this lack of agreement may reflect a failure to control for intrinsic variables (such as familiarity) and the problems associated with ceiling effects in the control data. Investigating picture naming in 32 AD patients and 34 elderly controls, we used bootstrap techniques to deal with the abnormal distributions in both groups. Our analyses revealed the previously reported impairment for naming living things in AD patients and that this persisted even when intrinsic variables were covaried; however, covarying control performance eliminated the significant category effect. Indeed, the within-group comparison of living and nonliving naming revealed a larger effect size for controls than patients. We conclude that the category effect in Alzheimer's disease is no larger than is expected in the healthy brain and may even represent a small diminution of the normal profile.     

The influence of surface and edge-based visual similarity on object recognition

The role of 'visual similarity' has been emphasised in object recognition and in particular, for category-specific agnosias. [Laws and Gale, 2002] recently described a measure of pixel-level visual overlap for line drawings (Euclidean Overlap: EO[line]) that distinguished living and nonliving things and predicted normal naming errors and latencies ( [Laws et al., 2002]). Nevertheless, it is important to extend such analyses to stimuli other than line drawings. We therefore developed the same measure for greyscale versions of the same stimuli (EO[grey]), i.e., that contain shading and texture information. EO[grey], however, failed to differentiate living from nonliving things and failed to correlate with naming latencies to the greyscale images. By contrast, EO[line] did correlate with the naming latencies. This suggests that similarity of edge information is more influential than similarity of surface characteristics for naming and for categorically separating living and nonliving things (be they line drawings or greyscale images).     

Outline shape is a mediator of object recognition that is particularly important for living things

We assess the importance of outline shape in mediating the recognition of living and nonliving things. Natural objects were presented as shaded line drawings or silhouettes, and were living and nonliving things. For object decision (deciding whether an object may be encountered in real life) there were longer response times to nonliving than to living things. Importantly, this category difference was greater for silhouettes than for shaded line drawings. For naming, similar category and stimulus differences were evident, but were not as pronounced. We also examined effects of prior naming on subsequent object decision performance. Repetition priming was equivalent for nonliving and living things. However, prior presentation of silhouettes (but not shaded line drawings) reduced the longer RT to nonliving things relative to living things in silhouette object decision. We propose that outline contour benefits recognition of living things more than nonliving things: For nonliving things, there may be greater 2-D/3-D interpretational ambiguity, and/or they may possess fewer salient features.     

A selective deficit for living things after temporal lobectomy for relief of epileptic seizures.

Unilateral left and right temporal lobectomy patients and normal control subjects were tested on confrontation naming, speeded naming, category generation, and category and associate matching tasks. Both groups of patients were disproportionately impaired for living relative to nonliving things in confrontation naming, speeded naming, and category generation. We argue that damage to the temporal lobe impairs lexical retrieval most strongly for living things and that the anterior temporal cortices are convergence zones particularly necessary for retrieving the names of living things.     

Names,concepts, features and the living/nonliving things dissociation

The present paper evaluates different hypotheses for explaining the living/nonliving things dissociation phenomenon in terms of feature type, considering the role of this dimension in the organization of conceptual semantic representations and in the activation of name representations. For this purpose we used Sloman and associates' (Memory and Cognition 27(3) (1999) 526; Cognitive Science 22(2) (1998) 189) name centrality and conceptual centrality tasks and asked subjects to judge functional and perceptual/visual features of living and nonliving items. Conceptual centrality results are more in accordance with a "single feature-domain connection hypothesis" where visual features are more important than functional features for the representation of living things and no feature type advantage is found for nonliving things. Name centrality results show that functional features are more important than sensory/visual features overall, a result that is not predicted by any of the hypotheses considered. The fact that the two judgments diverge emphasizes their importance for evaluating the role of feature type in the living/nonliving dissociation. Implications for explaining this phenomenon are also discussed.     

Musical instrument naming impairments: the crucial exception to the living/nonliving dichotomy in category-specific agnosia

In category-specific agnosia (CSA) patients typically have more trouble naming animals, fruits, and vegetables than tools, furniture, and articles of clothing. A crucial exception to this living vs nonliving rule involves the category of musical instruments. Patients with problems naming living objects often repeatedly fail to name musical instruments. In CSA it is crucial to equate living and nonliving object lists on object name frequency, complexity, and familiarity. The present study shows, however, that even the most rigorously controlled object lists can lead to erroneous conclusions if nonliving stimuli contain an overrepresentation of musical instruments. Naming capabilities of a herpes encephalitis patient were assessed using matched lists of living and nonliving objects and showed no indication of category-specific deficits. When exemplars were separated into biological objects, musical instruments and man-made artifacts, strong category-specificity emerged: artifact naming was flawless whereas musical instrument and biological object naming were both severely impaired. It is concluded that CSA is a veridical phenomenon but that our understanding of CSA is limited by adhering to the spurious living/nonliving distinction.     

Crowded and sparse domains in object recognition: consequences for categorization and naming

Some models of object recognition propose that items from structurally crowded categories (e.g., living things) permit faster access to superordinate semantic information than structurally dissimilar categories (e.g., nonliving things), but slower access to individual object information when naming items. We present four experiments that utilize the same matched stimuli: two examine superordinate categorization and two examine picture naming. Experiments 1 and 2 required participants to sort pictures into their appropriate superordinate categories and both revealed faster categorization for living than nonliving things. Nonetheless, the living thing superiority disappeared when the atypical categories of body parts and musical instruments were excluded. Experiment 3 examined naming latency and found no difference between living and nonliving things. This finding was replicated in Experiment 4 where the same items were presented in different formats (e.g., color and line-drawn versions). Taken as a whole, these experiments show that the ease with which people categorize items maps strongly onto the ease with which they name them.     

Visual similarity is greater for line drawings of nonliving than living things: the importance of musical instruments and body parts

It has been argued that greater intra-category structural similarity for living things, and the subsequent "visual crowding," makes them more difficult to recognize and name for neurologically damaged individuals and normal subjects (Humphreys et al., 1988). Nevertheless, the precise meaning and quantification of structural similarity remains unclear, as does the rationale for why it necessarily should be greater for living things. We derived a new measure of visual overlap from the Snodgrass and Vanderwart corpus of line drawings: the degree of pixel overlap within subcategories (Euclidean distance: ED). Contrary to existing notions of visual crowding and extant measures of contour overlap, within-category ED indicated less within-category visual overlap for living things. Furthermore, musical instruments clustered with living things (having low overlap), while body parts clustered with nonliving things (having high overlap). These counter-intuitive findings accord with patient data and thus, provide evidence for the psychological reality and utility of ED.     

Why is a verb like an inanimate object? Grammatical category and semantic category deficits

Semantic category effects, such as difficulties in naming animate things relative to inanimate objects, have been explained in terms of the relative weightings of perceptual and functional features within the semantic representations of these concepts. We argue that grammatical category deficits, such as difficulties in naming nouns relative to verbs, can be explained within the same framework. We hypothesize that verb concepts are richer in functional than sensory features and present a model of the semantic representations of animate nouns, inanimate nouns, and verbs. The model demonstrates that sensory feature damage results in a deficit for naming living things but spares verb naming, and functional feature damage results in a deficit for naming inanimate objects and verbs. We then report the assessment results of two patient groups. In accordance with the model's predictions, the "verb spared" patients were consistently worse at naming living things than inanimate objects, and their definitions of both living and nonliving items were lacking in sensory information. We conclude that damage to sensory features in semantic representations causes difficulties in naming concrete nouns relative to action verbs, and within the grammatical category of nouns, animate items will be more severely affected. Imageability was shown to be a strong predictor of naming performance in the "verb deficit" patients, and when this variable was controlled no class effect remained. Production of definitions revealed no differential damage to sensory or functional features, and no consistent effect of animacy in naming was shown. While the model suggests that verb deficits might occur in patients for whom functional features are damaged relative to sensory features, we conclude that the "verb deficit" shown in our patients (and potentially in many previously reported cases) was an artifact of the lower imageability of verbs in confrontation naming tasks.     

Sometimes a noun is just a noun: comments on Bird, Howard, and Franklin (2000)

Bird, Howard, and Franklin (2000) have proposed a semantic-conceptual explanation of grammatical category-specific deficits that attributes impairments in noun and verb processing to two distinct mechanisms. According to their account, apparent deficits in verb production are not category specific, but rather result from the lower imageability of verbs compared to concrete nouns. Noun deficits are said to result from differences in the distribution of semantic feature types such that damage to sensory features results in disproportionate impairments in naming nouns, especially animate nouns, compared to verbs. However, this hypothesis, which we call the "extended sensory/functional theory" (ESFT), fails on several counts. First, the assumption that representations of living things are more heavily freighted with sensory features than are those of nonliving objects does not have any reliable empirical basis. Second, the ESFT incorrectly predicts associations between deficits in processing sensory features and living things or functional features and nonliving things. Finally, there are numerous cases of patients with grammatical category-specific deficits that do not seem to be consistent with damage at the semantic level. All of this suggests that the ESFT is not a useful model for considering grammatical (or semantic) category-specific deficits.     

The visual basis of category effects in object identification: evidence from the visual hemifield paradigm

The basis for the category specific living things advantage in object recognition (i.e., faster and more accurate identification of living compared to nonliving things) was investigated in two experiments. It was hypothesised that the global shape of living things on average provides more information about their basic level identity than the global shape of nonliving things. In two experiments subjects performed name-picture or picture-name verification tasks, in which blurred or clear images of living and nonliving things were presented in either the right or the left visual hemifield. With blurred images, recognition performance was worst for nonliving things presented to the right visual field/left hemisphere, indicating that the lack of visual detail in the stimulus combined with a left hemisphere bias toward processing high frequency visual elements proved detrimental for processing nonliving stimuli in this condition. In addition, an overall living things advantage was observed in both experiments. This advantage was considerably larger with blurred images than with clear. These results are compatible with the global shape hypothesis and converge with evidence using other paradigms.     

Developmental "Roots" in Mature Biological Knowledge

ABSTRACT— Young children tend to claim that moving artifacts and nonliving natural kinds are alive, but neglect to ascribe life to plants. This research tested whether adults exhibit similar confusions when verifying life status in a speeded classification task. Experiment 1 showed that undergraduates encounter greater difficulty (reduced accuracy and increased response times) in determining life status for plants, relative to animals, and for natural and moving nonliving things, relative to artifacts and nonmoving things. Experiment 2 replicated these effects in university biology professors. The professors showed a significantly reduced effect size for living things, as compared with the students, but still showed greater difficulty for plants than animals, even as no differences from the students were apparent in their responses to nonliving things. These results suggest that mature biological knowledge relies on a developmental foundation that is not radically overwritten or erased with the profound conceptual changes that accompany mastery of the domain.     

Semantic processing of living and nonliving concepts across the cerebral hemispheres

Studies of patients with category-specific semantic deficits suggest that the right and left cerebral hemispheres may be differently involved in the processing of living and nonliving domains concepts. In this study, we investigate whether there are hemisphere differences in the semantic processing of these domains in healthy volunteers. Based on the neuropsychological findings, we predicted a disadvantage for nonliving compared to living concepts in the right hemisphere. Our prediction was supported, in that semantic decisions to nonliving concepts were significantly slower and more error-prone when presented to the right hemisphere. In contrast there were no hemisphere differences for living concepts. These findings are consistent with either differential representation or processing of concepts across right and left hemispheres. However, we also found a disadvantage for nonliving things compared to living things in the left hemisphere, which is not consistent with a simple representation account. We discuss these findings in terms of qualitatively different semantic processing in right and left hemispheres within the framework of a distributed model of conceptual representation.     

Category-specific naming effect in non-brain-damaged individuals

A category effect (i.e., living vs. nonliving exemplars) in confrontation naming has been reported in association with various cerebral pathologies. However, the published reports conflict as to the presence of this category effect in normal controls. The present experiment included 90 subjects in three age groups (young, young-elderly, and old-elderly) and controlled the stimuli in two major ways: by increasing the difficulty level to avoid a ceiling effect, and by equating the stimulus lists on five important word property variables (word frequency, familiarity, age of acquisition, visual complexity, and name agreement). The results confirmed that the category effect was present in the two elderly groups but not in the younger group. However, a gender effect was evidenced in the younger group but not in the two elderly groups. Overall, these results suggest that the category effect reported in neurological populations represents at least in part the influence of normal aging on semantic memory.     

Measuring the influence of similarity on category-specific effects

There is evidence for both advantages and disadvantages in normal recognition of living over nonliving things. This paradox has been attributed to high levels of perceptual similarity within living categories having a different effect on performance in different contexts. However, since living things are intrinsically more similar to each other, previous studies could not determine whether the various category effects were due to perceptual similarity, or to other characteristics of living things. We used novel animal and vehicle stimuli that were matched for similarity to measure the influence of perceptual similarity in different contexts. We found that displaying highly similar objects in blocked sets reduced their perceived similarity, eliminating the detrimental effect on naming performance. Experiment 1 demonstrated a disadvantage for highly similar objects in name learning and name verification using mixed groups of similar and dissimilar animals and vehicles. Experiment 2 demonstrated no disadvantage for the same highly similar objects when they were blocked, e.g., similar animals presented alone. Thus, perceptual similarity, rather than other characteristics particular to living things, is affected by context, and could create apparent category effects under certain testing conditions.