Department of Psychology, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina 29208, USA.
Hum Brain Mapp. 2010 Oct;31(10):1459-68. doi: 10.1002/hbm.20950.
A number of studies have investigated differences in neural correlates of abstract and concrete concepts with disagreement across results. A quantitative, coordinate-based meta-analysis combined data from 303 participants across 19 functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) studies to identify the differences in neural representation of abstract and concrete concepts. Studies that reported peak activations in standard space in contrast of abstract > concrete or concrete > abstract concepts at a whole brain level in healthy adults were included in this meta-analysis. Multilevel kernel density analysis (MKDA) was performed to identify the proportion of activated contrasts weighted by sample size and analysis type (fixed or random effects). Meta-analysis results indicated consistent and meaningful differences in neural representation for abstract and concrete concepts. Abstract concepts elicit greater activity in the inferior frontal gyrus and middle temporal gyrus compared to concrete concepts, while concrete concepts elicit greater activity in the posterior cingulate, precuneus, fusiform gyrus, and parahippocampal gyrus compared to abstract concepts. These results suggest greater engagement of the verbal system for processing of abstract concepts and greater engagement of the perceptual system for processing of concrete concepts, likely via mental imagery.
许多研究调查了抽象和具体概念的神经相关性差异,但结果存在分歧。一项定量、基于坐标的荟萃分析结合了来自 19 项功能磁共振成像 (fMRI) 和正电子发射断层扫描 (PET) 研究的 303 名参与者的数据,以确定抽象和具体概念的神经表示的差异。本荟萃分析纳入了在健康成年人中报告在标准空间中出现峰值激活的研究,这些研究对比了抽象>具体或具体>抽象概念在全脑水平上的差异。采用多层次核密度分析 (MKDA) 来确定按样本量和分析类型(固定或随机效应)加权的激活对比的比例。荟萃分析结果表明,抽象和具体概念的神经表示存在一致且有意义的差异。与具体概念相比,抽象概念在额下回和颞中回引起更大的活动,而与抽象概念相比,具体概念在后扣带回、楔前叶、梭状回和海马旁回引起更大的活动。这些结果表明,抽象概念的处理需要更广泛的语言系统参与,而具体概念的处理则需要更广泛的感知系统参与,可能是通过心理意象。