Cargando…

Automatic and Intentional Number Processing Both Rely on Intact Right Parietal Cortex: A Combined fMRI and Neuronavigated TMS Study

Practice and training usually lead to performance increase in a given task. In addition, a shift from intentional toward more automatic processing mechanisms is often observed. It is currently debated whether automatic and intentional processing is subserved by the same or by different mechanism(s),...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cohen Kadosh, Roi, Bien, Nina, Sack, Alexander T.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Research Foundation 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3269809/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22347175
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00002
_version_ 1782222514601066496
author Cohen Kadosh, Roi
Bien, Nina
Sack, Alexander T.
author_facet Cohen Kadosh, Roi
Bien, Nina
Sack, Alexander T.
author_sort Cohen Kadosh, Roi
collection PubMed
description Practice and training usually lead to performance increase in a given task. In addition, a shift from intentional toward more automatic processing mechanisms is often observed. It is currently debated whether automatic and intentional processing is subserved by the same or by different mechanism(s), and whether the same or different regions in the brain are recruited. Previous correlational evidence provided by behavioral, neuroimaging, modeling, and neuropsychological studies addressing this question yielded conflicting results. Here we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to compare the causal influence of disrupting either left or right parietal cortex during automatic and intentional numerical processing, as reflected by the size congruity effect and the numerical distance effect, respectively. We found a functional hemispheric asymmetry within parietal cortex with only the TMS-induced right parietal disruption impairing both automatic and intentional numerical processing. In contrast, disrupting the left parietal lobe with TMS, or applying sham stimulation, did not affect performance during automatic or intentional numerical processing. The current results provide causal evidence for the functional relevance of right, but not left, parietal cortex for intentional, and automatic numerical processing, implying that at least within the parietal cortices, automatic, and intentional numerical processing rely on the same underlying hemispheric lateralization.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3269809
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Frontiers Research Foundation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32698092012-02-15 Automatic and Intentional Number Processing Both Rely on Intact Right Parietal Cortex: A Combined fMRI and Neuronavigated TMS Study Cohen Kadosh, Roi Bien, Nina Sack, Alexander T. Front Hum Neurosci Neuroscience Practice and training usually lead to performance increase in a given task. In addition, a shift from intentional toward more automatic processing mechanisms is often observed. It is currently debated whether automatic and intentional processing is subserved by the same or by different mechanism(s), and whether the same or different regions in the brain are recruited. Previous correlational evidence provided by behavioral, neuroimaging, modeling, and neuropsychological studies addressing this question yielded conflicting results. Here we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to compare the causal influence of disrupting either left or right parietal cortex during automatic and intentional numerical processing, as reflected by the size congruity effect and the numerical distance effect, respectively. We found a functional hemispheric asymmetry within parietal cortex with only the TMS-induced right parietal disruption impairing both automatic and intentional numerical processing. In contrast, disrupting the left parietal lobe with TMS, or applying sham stimulation, did not affect performance during automatic or intentional numerical processing. The current results provide causal evidence for the functional relevance of right, but not left, parietal cortex for intentional, and automatic numerical processing, implying that at least within the parietal cortices, automatic, and intentional numerical processing rely on the same underlying hemispheric lateralization. Frontiers Research Foundation 2012-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC3269809/ /pubmed/22347175 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00002 Text en Copyright © 2012 Cohen Kadosh, Bien and Sack. http://www.frontiersin.org/licenseagreement This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial License, which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in other forums, provided the original authors and source are credited.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Cohen Kadosh, Roi
Bien, Nina
Sack, Alexander T.
Automatic and Intentional Number Processing Both Rely on Intact Right Parietal Cortex: A Combined fMRI and Neuronavigated TMS Study
title Automatic and Intentional Number Processing Both Rely on Intact Right Parietal Cortex: A Combined fMRI and Neuronavigated TMS Study
title_full Automatic and Intentional Number Processing Both Rely on Intact Right Parietal Cortex: A Combined fMRI and Neuronavigated TMS Study
title_fullStr Automatic and Intentional Number Processing Both Rely on Intact Right Parietal Cortex: A Combined fMRI and Neuronavigated TMS Study
title_full_unstemmed Automatic and Intentional Number Processing Both Rely on Intact Right Parietal Cortex: A Combined fMRI and Neuronavigated TMS Study
title_short Automatic and Intentional Number Processing Both Rely on Intact Right Parietal Cortex: A Combined fMRI and Neuronavigated TMS Study
title_sort automatic and intentional number processing both rely on intact right parietal cortex: a combined fmri and neuronavigated tms study
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3269809/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22347175
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00002
work_keys_str_mv AT cohenkadoshroi automaticandintentionalnumberprocessingbothrelyonintactrightparietalcortexacombinedfmriandneuronavigatedtmsstudy
AT biennina automaticandintentionalnumberprocessingbothrelyonintactrightparietalcortexacombinedfmriandneuronavigatedtmsstudy
AT sackalexandert automaticandintentionalnumberprocessingbothrelyonintactrightparietalcortexacombinedfmriandneuronavigatedtmsstudy