Placing Area MT in Context.

In this article I raise empirical challenges for the claim that area MT/V5 is the neural correlate for visual experience as of motion (Block, 2005). In particular, Ifocus on the claim that there is matching content between area MT, on one hand, and visual experience as of motion, on the other hand (...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Journal of Consciousness Studies Vol. 20; no. 5/6; pp. 93 - 105
Autor principal: Madary, Michael
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Imprint Academic May/June2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=88165098&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 88165098
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        13558250
        41J
      jtl: Journal of Consciousness Studies
      issn: 13558250
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: May/June2013
      vid: 20
      iid: 5/6
      pid: 899
      pub: Imprint Academic
    artinfo:
      ui: 88165098
      ppf: 93
      ppct: 12
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Placing Area MT in Context.
      aug:
        au: Madary, Michael
      su:
        Cognitive neuroscience
        Consciousness
        Motion perception (Vision)
        Philosophy of mind
        Brain function localization
      sug:
        subj:
          Cognitive neuroscience
          Consciousness
          Motion perception (Vision)
          Philosophy of mind
          Brain function localization
      ab: In this article I raise empirical challenges for the claim that area MT/V5 is the neural correlate for visual experience as of motion (Block, 2005). In particular, Ifocus on the claim that there is matching content between area MT, on one hand, and visual experience as of motion, on the other hand (Chalmers, 2000; Block, 2007). I survey two lines of empirical evidence which challenge the claim of matching content in area MT. The first line of evidence covers new results in neuroscience which emphasize the ongoing dynamics in cortical activity. The second line of evidence focuses on results regarding area MT in particular (Maier, Logothetis and Leopold, 2007; Cohen and Newsome, 2008). Together, the empirical results indicate that neural processing is context sensitive in a way that challenges the attribution of content to local areas of the cortex, to area MT in particular. In the final part of the article I explore alternative approaches and discuss remaining issues.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2013
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N