Skip to main content Accessibility help
×

Temporary Disruption

We have implemented additional assurance measures to protect our systems.

As a result, we have suspended some of our systems and services. We apologise for any temporary disruption some customers may experience.

  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

3 results

  • 9 - Visual encoding of coherent and non-coherent scenes

  • Edited by Jürgen Bohnemeyer, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Eric Pederson, University of Oregon
  • Book:
    Event Representation in Language and Cognition
    Published online:
    01 March 2011
    Print publication:
    23 December 2010, pp 189-215

  • Summary

    Introduction

    Perceiving and talking about events taking place in the world around us is an essential part of our everyday life and crucial for social interaction with other human beings. Visual perception and language production are both involved in this complex cognitive behavior and have been investigated individually in numerous empirical studies. Extensive models have been provided for both domains (see Hoffmann 2000; Levelt 1989, for overviews). But an integrative approach to the interface between vision and speaking, to “seeing for speaking,” is still lacking. Psycholinguists have only recently begun to experimentally investigate how visual encoding and linguistic encoding interact when we describe events and their protagonists or participants (see Henderson and Ferreira, 2004b). These studies have answered some, but raised many more general and specific questions:

    • How does visual encoding of events evolve; how detailed are representations of the visual world generated at various points during visual encoding?

    • How is visual encoding linked to stages of linguistic encoding for speaking?

    • Is the visual encoding of an event influenced by the linguistic task that subjects have to perform in experiments (e.g., describing scenes with full sentences vs. naming individual scene actors, and so on)?

    • Is visual encoding influenced by the type of stimulus – in particular, are there differences between line drawings and naturalistic stimuli?

    • Does the encoding of (parts of) coherent scenes differ from the encoding of (parts of) scenes in which objects, animals or people do not interact in ways that could be straightforwardly interpreted as meaningful, coherent action?

  • Reduced amygdala–prefrontal coupling in major depression: association with MAOA genotype and illness severity

  • Udo Dannlowski, Patricia Ohrmann, Carsten Konrad, Katharina Domschke, Jochen Bauer, Harald Kugel, Christa Hohoff, Sonja Schöning, Anette Kersting, Bernhard T. Baune, Lena S. Mortensen, Volker Arolt, Pienie Zwitserlood, Jürgen Deckert, Walter Heindel, Thomas Suslow
  • Journal:
    / Volume 12 / Issue 1 / February 2009
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    11 June 2008, pp. 11-22
    Print publication:
    February 2009

  • The amygdala plays a pivotal role in a cortico-limbic circuitry implicated in emotion processing and regulation. In the present study, functional connectivity of the amygdala with prefrontal areas involved in emotion regulation was investigated during a facial expression processing task in a sample of 34 depressed inpatients and 31 healthy controls. All patients were genotyped for a common functional variable number tandem repeat (VNTR) polymorphism in the promoter region of the monoamine oxidase A gene (MAOA u-VNTR) which has been previously associated with major depression as well as reduced cortico-limbic connectivity in healthy subjects. In our control group, we observed tight coupling of the amygdala and dorsal prefrontal areas comprising the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), dorsal parts of the anterior cingulate cortex (dACC), and lateral orbitofrontal cortex. Amygdala–prefrontal connectivity was significantly reduced in depressed patients and carriers of the higher active MAOA risk alleles (MAOA-H). Hence, depressed MAOA-H carriers showed the weakest amygdala–prefrontal coupling of the investigated subgroups. Furthermore, reduced coupling of this circuitry predicted more than 40% variance of clinical variables characterizing a longer and more severe course of disease. We conclude that genetic variation in the MAOA gene may affect the course of major depression by disrupting cortico-limbic connectivity.