title: The potato chip really does look like Elvis! Neural hallmarks of conceptual processing associated with finding novel shapes subjectively meaningful.
abstract: Clouds and inkblots often compellingly resemble something else--faces, animals, or other identifiable objects. Here, we investigated illusions of meaning produced by novel visual shapes. Individuals found some shapes meaningful and others meaningless, with considerable variability among individuals in these subjective categorizations. Repetition for shapes endorsed as meaningful produced conceptual priming in a priming test along with concurrent activity reductions in cortical regions associated with conceptual processing of real objects. Subjectively meaningless shapes elicited robust activity in the same brain areas, but activity was not influenced by repetition. Thus, all shapes were conceptually evaluated, but stable conceptual representations supported neural priming for meaningful shapes only. During a recognition memory test, performance was associated with increased frontoparietal activity, regardless of meaningfulness. In contrast, neural conceptual priming effects for meaningful shapes occurred during both priming and recognition testing. These different patterns of brain activation as a function of stimulus repetition, type of memory test, and subjective meaningfulness underscore the distinctive neural bases of conceptual fluency versus episodic memory retrieval. Finding meaning in ambiguous stimuli appears to depend on conceptual evaluation and cortical processing events similar to those typically observed for known objects. To the brain, the vaguely Elvis-like potato chip truly can provide a substitute for the King himself.
authors.affiliation: Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. joelvoss@illinois.edu
authors.forename: Joel L
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: Voss
authors.forename: Kara D
authors.initials: KD
authors.lastname: Federmeier
authors.forename: Ken A
authors.initials: KA
authors.lastname: Paller
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D001921:Brain / Q000502:physiology*; D003210:Concept Formation / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D005556:Form Perception / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D021641:Recognition, Psychology / Q000502:physiology*; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Jan 25;102(4):1257-62
references.pmid: 15657126
references.citation: Psychopathology. 2001 Mar-Apr;34(2):75-80
references.pmid: 11244378
references.citation: Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2007 Apr;17(2):171-6
references.pmid: 17303410
references.citation: Prog Neurobiol. 2003 May;70(1):53-81
references.pmid: 12927334
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2010 Oct 6;30(40):13272-80
references.pmid: 20926653
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2006 Jan 18;26(3):926-33
references.pmid: 16421312
references.citation: Brain. 2000 Mar;123 Pt 3:620-40
references.pmid: 10686183
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 1991 Nov;19(6):617-23
references.pmid: 1758306
references.citation: Cereb Cortex. 2008 Jul;18(7):1712-9
references.pmid: 18056085
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2002 Mar;13(2):190-3
references.pmid: 11934007
references.citation: Psychophysiology. 2011 Apr;48(4):532-46
references.pmid: 20701709
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2006 Jan 18;26(3):792-800
references.pmid: 16421299
references.citation: Learn Mem. 2007 Apr 05;14(4):259-67
references.pmid: 17412965
references.citation: Annu Rev Psychol. 2007;58:25-45
references.pmid: 16968210
references.citation: Neuron. 2001 Sep 27;31(6):1047-59
references.pmid: 11580903
references.citation: Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2001 Apr;11(2):194-201
references.pmid: 11301239
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Jun;11(6):251-7
references.pmid: 17481940
references.citation: J Cogn Neurosci. 1996 Nov;8(6):551-565
references.pmid: 20740065
references.citation: Neuroreport. 2009 Mar 4;20(4):403-7
references.pmid: 19218867
references.citation: Hippocampus. 2005;15(3):326-32
references.pmid: 15490462
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2005 Sep;9(9):445-53
references.pmid: 16054861
references.citation: Exp Brain Res. 1982;47(3):329-42
references.pmid: 7128705
references.citation: Neuron. 1998 Feb;20(2):185-95
references.pmid: 9491981
references.citation: Comput Biomed Res. 1996 Jun;29(3):162-73
references.pmid: 8812068
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 1999 Apr;2(4):311-4
references.pmid: 10204536
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Jun;11(6):243-50
references.pmid: 17475539
references.citation: Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2009 Dec;67(4):1117-23
references.pmid: 20069234
references.citation: Annu Rev Psychol. 2011;62:621-47
references.pmid: 20809790
references.citation: Psychophysiology. 2011 Feb;48(2):176-86
references.pmid: 20624252
references.citation: Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000 Jun;911:166-74
references.pmid: 10911873
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Feb 3;95(3):891-8
references.pmid: 9448256
references.citation: J Cogn Neurosci. 2010 Apr;22(4):618-20
references.pmid: 19422290
references.citation: J Cogn Neurosci. 2010 Nov;22(11):2638-51
references.pmid: 19702474
references.citation: Hippocampus. 2009 Sep;19(9):773-8
references.pmid: 19405122
references.citation: Neuroimage. 2010 Feb 1;49(3):2879-89
references.pmid: 19770053
references.citation: Neuropsychologia. 2008 Nov;46(13):3021-9
references.pmid: 18691605
references.citation: Neuroimage. 2006 Oct 1;32(4):1879-90
references.pmid: 16777433