General Forum

General Forum

Perceptions

Standard membermikelom
General 21 Apr '13 09:17
  1. Wat?
    Joined
    16 Aug '05
    Moves
    76863
    21 Apr '13 09:17
    of one's own thread killer. FYI ponderable.

    Previous functional imaging studies have shown that facilitated processing of a visual object on repeated, relative to initial, presentation (i.e., repetition priming) is associated with reductions in neural activity in multiple regions, including fusiform/lateral occipital cortex. Moreover, activity reductions have been found, at diminished levels, when a different exemplar of an object is presented on repetition. In one previous study, the magnitude of diminished priming across exemplars was greater in the right relative to the left fusiform, suggesting greater exemplar specificity in the right. Another previous study, however, observed fusiform lateralization modulated by object viewpoint, but not object exemplar. The present fMRI study sought to determine whether the result of differential fusiform responses for perceptually different exemplars could be replicated. Furthermore, the role of the left fusiform cortex in object recognition was investigated via the inclusion of a lexical/semantic manipulation. Right fusiform cortex showed a significantly greater effect of exemplar change than left fusiform, replicating the previous result of exemplar-specific fusiform lateralization. Right fusiform and lateral occipital cortex were not differentially engaged by the lexical/semantic manipulation, suggesting that their role in visual object recognition is predominantly in the visual discrimination of specific objects. Activation in left fusiform cortex, but not left lateral occipital cortex, was modulated by both exemplar change and lexical/semantic manipulation, with further analysis suggesting a posterior-to-anterior progression between regions involved in processing visuoperceptual and lexical/semantic information about objects. The results are consistent with the view that the right fusiform plays a greater role in processing specific visual form information about objects, whereas the left fusiform is also involved in lexical/semantic processing.

    c/o : http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S105381190300096X

    -m.

    Interesting to me, anyway. 😛
  2. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    21 Apr '13 09:53
    Originally posted by mikelom
    of one's own thread killer. FYI ponderable.

    Previous functional imaging studies have shown that facilitated processing of a visual object on repeated, relative to initial, presentation (i.e., repetition priming) is associated with reductions in neural activity in multiple regions, including fusiform/lateral occipital cortex. Moreover, activity reducti ...[text shortened]... www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S105381190300096X

    -m.

    Interesting to me, anyway. 😛
    "Wat?"
    (lol)
    -b.
    Reveal Hidden Content
    Seriously, Mike, the Studies are Fascinating
  3. Dublin Ireland
    Joined
    31 Oct '12
    Moves
    14235
    21 Apr '13 10:28
    Your honour, I represent the plaintiff in this case.
    The plaintiff being the retina.

    We shall show the jury that the defendants in this case
    are guilty of fraud. The defendants being the occipital lobe
    and the visual cortex.

    We will show that these two conspired together in fusiform
    to commit fraud upon the retina knowing that the amount of
    light hitting the back of the retina is reduced to 50% after the
    age of forty years. the retina thought that he saw images
    which were actually totally different because the occipital
    lobe and the visual cortex compounded the situation and the
    plaintiff saw something completely different from that which
    was actually taking place.

    It was sleight of hand your honour and we have MRI scans to show
    that the integrity of the occipital lobe and the visual cortex were
    impaired to such a degree as to be not fit for purpose.

    We will ask for the highest penalty under law and medicine to be
    applied in this case and that the defendants be made liable for the
    costs of corrective reading lenses.
  4. Joined
    14 Mar '04
    Moves
    97046
    21 Apr '13 11:17
    Originally posted by johnnylongwoody
    Your honour, I represent the plaintiff in this case.
    The plaintiff being the retina.

    We shall show the jury that the defendants in this case
    are guilty of fraud. The defendants being the occipital lobe
    and the visual cortex.

    We will show that these two conspired together in fusiform
    to commit fraud upon the retina knowing that the amou ...[text shortened]... in this case and that the defendants be made liable for the
    costs of corrective reading lenses.
    His honour: "Just one moment there, I forgot to turn on my hearing aid. Could you repeat that please?"
  5. Dublin Ireland
    Joined
    31 Oct '12
    Moves
    14235
    21 Apr '13 11:23
    Originally posted by Great Big Stees
    His honour: "Just one moment there, I forgot to turn on my hearing aid. Could you repeat that please?"
    Bailiff!!!! Explain to the judge that I would like him to prepare an arrest warrant
    for the Auditory canal, the hammer, the anvil and the eardrum.

    They should also be in the dock along with the occipital lobe and the visual cortex.
    They should be brought up in my opinion on charges of perverting the course of
    justice by preventing his honour the privilege of being able to hear the merits
    of the argument by Counsel for the Defence.

    I shall seek a continuance until said defendants appear.
  6. Wat?
    Joined
    16 Aug '05
    Moves
    76863
    21 Apr '13 12:23
    Originally posted by johnnylongwoody
    Bailiff!!!! Explain to the judge that I would like him to prepare an arrest warrant
    for the Auditory canal, the hammer, the anvil and the eardrum.

    They should also be in the dock along with the occipital lobe and the visual cortex.
    They should be brought up in my opinion on charges of perverting the course of
    justice by preventing his honour ...[text shortened]... argument by Counsel for the Defence.

    I shall seek a continuance until said defendants appear.
    It was only my soul's imagination Sir, and that is not a part of my cortex; or is it?

    -m. 😉
  7. Joined
    14 Mar '04
    Moves
    97046
    21 Apr '13 13:23
    Originally posted by mikelom
    It was only my soul's imagination Sir, and that is not a part of my cortex; or is it?

    -m. 😉
    His honour: "What on earth has a woman's hygiene product got to do with these proceedings?"
    Bailiff: "Sir, he said CORTEX".
    His honour: "Oh, sorry. Damn hearing aid, continue."
  8. Wat?
    Joined
    16 Aug '05
    Moves
    76863
    21 Apr '13 14:32
    Originally posted by Great Big Stees
    His honour: "What on earth has a woman's hygiene product got to do with these proceedings?"
    Bailiff: "Sir, he said CORTEX".
    His honour: "Oh, sorry. Damn hearing aid, continue."
    Bailiff: 'sir, DUREX has nothing to do with a woman's hygienic product, Shirley?'
  9. Dublin Ireland
    Joined
    31 Oct '12
    Moves
    14235
    21 Apr '13 15:37
    Originally posted by mikelom
    Bailiff: 'sir, DUREX has nothing to do with a woman's hygienic product, Shirley?'
    No your honour that's Duracell.

    Duracell batteries you want for that hearing aid not Durex.

    And when you pass sentence make sure it's a Duracell Sentence.

    That's 50% longer than any other sentence.
  10. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35761
    21 Apr '13 23:06
    Originally posted by johnnylongwoody
    Your honour, I represent the plaintiff in this case.
    The plaintiff being the retina.

    We shall show the jury that the defendants in this case
    are guilty of fraud. The defendants being the occipital lobe
    and the visual cortex.

    We will show that these two conspired together in fusiform
    to commit fraud upon the retina knowing that the amou ...[text shortened]... in this case and that the defendants be made liable for the
    costs of corrective reading lenses.
    Wall o' text bad, paragraphs good.
Back to Top