Automatic and intentional number processing both rely on intact right parietal cortex: a combined FMRI and neuronavigated TMS study.
Practice and training usually lead to performance increase in a given task. In addition, a shift from intentional toward more automatic processing mechanisms is often observed. It is currently debated whether automatic and intentional processing is subserved by the same or by different mechanism(s),...
| मुख्य लेखकों: | , , |
|---|---|
| स्वरूप: | Journal article |
| भाषा: | English |
| प्रकाशित: |
2012
|
| _version_ | 1826301260347736064 |
|---|---|
| author | Cohen Kadosh, R Bien, N Sack, A |
| author_facet | Cohen Kadosh, R Bien, N Sack, A |
| author_sort | Cohen Kadosh, R |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | Practice and training usually lead to performance increase in a given task. In addition, a shift from intentional toward more automatic processing mechanisms is often observed. It is currently debated whether automatic and intentional processing is subserved by the same or by different mechanism(s), and whether the same or different regions in the brain are recruited. Previous correlational evidence provided by behavioral, neuroimaging, modeling, and neuropsychological studies addressing this question yielded conflicting results. Here we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to compare the causal influence of disrupting either left or right parietal cortex during automatic and intentional numerical processing, as reflected by the size congruity effect and the numerical distance effect, respectively. We found a functional hemispheric asymmetry within parietal cortex with only the TMS-induced right parietal disruption impairing both automatic and intentional numerical processing. In contrast, disrupting the left parietal lobe with TMS, or applying sham stimulation, did not affect performance during automatic or intentional numerical processing. The current results provide causal evidence for the functional relevance of right, but not left, parietal cortex for intentional, and automatic numerical processing, implying that at least within the parietal cortices, automatic, and intentional numerical processing rely on the same underlying hemispheric lateralization. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:29:42Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:e1d09c3a-903f-44d6-a31e-bea0cc56b07c |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:29:42Z |
| publishDate | 2012 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:e1d09c3a-903f-44d6-a31e-bea0cc56b07c2022-03-27T09:56:53ZAutomatic and intentional number processing both rely on intact right parietal cortex: a combined FMRI and neuronavigated TMS study.Journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:e1d09c3a-903f-44d6-a31e-bea0cc56b07cEnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2012Cohen Kadosh, RBien, NSack, APractice and training usually lead to performance increase in a given task. In addition, a shift from intentional toward more automatic processing mechanisms is often observed. It is currently debated whether automatic and intentional processing is subserved by the same or by different mechanism(s), and whether the same or different regions in the brain are recruited. Previous correlational evidence provided by behavioral, neuroimaging, modeling, and neuropsychological studies addressing this question yielded conflicting results. Here we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to compare the causal influence of disrupting either left or right parietal cortex during automatic and intentional numerical processing, as reflected by the size congruity effect and the numerical distance effect, respectively. We found a functional hemispheric asymmetry within parietal cortex with only the TMS-induced right parietal disruption impairing both automatic and intentional numerical processing. In contrast, disrupting the left parietal lobe with TMS, or applying sham stimulation, did not affect performance during automatic or intentional numerical processing. The current results provide causal evidence for the functional relevance of right, but not left, parietal cortex for intentional, and automatic numerical processing, implying that at least within the parietal cortices, automatic, and intentional numerical processing rely on the same underlying hemispheric lateralization. |
| spellingShingle | Cohen Kadosh, R Bien, N Sack, A Automatic and intentional number processing both rely on intact right parietal cortex: a combined FMRI and neuronavigated TMS study. |
| title | Automatic and intentional number processing both rely on intact right parietal cortex: a combined FMRI and neuronavigated TMS study. |
| title_full | Automatic and intentional number processing both rely on intact right parietal cortex: a combined FMRI and neuronavigated TMS study. |
| title_fullStr | Automatic and intentional number processing both rely on intact right parietal cortex: a combined FMRI and neuronavigated TMS study. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Automatic and intentional number processing both rely on intact right parietal cortex: a combined FMRI and neuronavigated TMS study. |
| title_short | Automatic and intentional number processing both rely on intact right parietal cortex: a combined FMRI and neuronavigated TMS study. |
| title_sort | automatic and intentional number processing both rely on intact right parietal cortex a combined fmri and neuronavigated tms study |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT cohenkadoshr automaticandintentionalnumberprocessingbothrelyonintactrightparietalcortexacombinedfmriandneuronavigatedtmsstudy AT bienn automaticandintentionalnumberprocessingbothrelyonintactrightparietalcortexacombinedfmriandneuronavigatedtmsstudy AT sacka automaticandintentionalnumberprocessingbothrelyonintactrightparietalcortexacombinedfmriandneuronavigatedtmsstudy |