MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit Cambridge, UK.
Front Psychol. 2013 Feb 13;4:50. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00050. eCollection 2013.
Semantic knowledge is based on the way we perceive and interact with the world. However, the jury is still out on the question: to what degree are neuronal systems that subserve acquisition of semantic knowledge, such as sensory-motor networks, involved in its representation and processing? We will begin with a critical evaluation of the main behavioral and neuroimaging methods with respect to their capability to define the functional roles of specific brain areas. Any behavioral or neuroscientific measure is a conflation of representations and processes. Hence, a combination of behavioral and neurophysiological interactions as well as time-course information is required to define the functional roles of brain areas. This will guide our review of the empirical literature. Most research in this area has been done on semantics of concrete words, where clear theoretical frameworks for an involvement of sensory-motor systems in semantics exist. Most of this evidence still stems from correlational studies that are ambiguous with respect to the behavioral relevance of effects. Evidence for causal effects of sensory-motor systems on semantic processes is still scarce but evolving. Relatively few neuroscientific studies so far have investigated the embodiment of abstract semantics for words, numbers, and arithmetic facts. Here, some correlational evidence exists, but data on causality are mostly absent. We conclude that neuroimaging data, just as behavioral data, have so far not disentangled the fundamental link between process and representation. Future studies should therefore put more emphasis on the effects of task and context on semantic processing. Strong conclusions can only be drawn from a combination of methods that provide time-course information, determine the connectivity among poly- or amodal and sensory-motor areas, link behavioral with neuroimaging measures, and allow causal inferences. We will conclude with suggestions on how this could be accomplished in future research.
语义知识基于我们感知和与世界互动的方式。然而,对于以下问题仍存在争议:在多大程度上,支持语义知识获取的神经元系统,如感觉运动网络,参与了其表示和处理?我们将首先批判性地评估主要的行为和神经影像学方法,以了解它们定义特定脑区功能角色的能力。任何行为或神经科学的测量都是表示和过程的混合。因此,需要结合行为和神经生理相互作用以及时程信息来定义脑区的功能角色。这将指导我们对实证文献的回顾。该领域的大多数研究都是关于具体词的语义,在这些研究中,感觉运动系统参与语义存在明确的理论框架。大多数证据仍然来自于相关性研究,这些研究对于效应的行为相关性是模糊的。感觉运动系统对语义过程的因果效应的证据仍然很少,但正在发展。迄今为止,相对较少的神经科学研究调查了词、数字和算术事实的抽象语义的体现。这里存在一些相关性证据,但因果数据大多缺失。我们得出结论,神经影像学数据和行为数据一样,到目前为止都没有理清过程和表示之间的基本联系。因此,未来的研究应该更加重视任务和上下文对语义处理的影响。只有将提供时程信息、确定多模态和感觉运动区域之间的连接、将行为与神经影像学测量联系起来并允许因果推断的方法结合起来,才能得出强有力的结论。我们将在结论中提出如何在未来的研究中实现这一目标的建议。