Naturalistic Audio-Movies and Narrative Synchronize "Visual" Cortices across Congenitally Blind But Not Sighted Individuals

Developing cortex is functionally pluripotent: Evidence from blindness

How rigidly does innate architecture constrain function of developing cortex? What is the contribution of early experience? We review insights into these questions from visual cortex function in people born blind. In blindness, occipital cortices are active during auditory and tactile tasks. What 'cross-modal' plasticity tells us about cortical flexibility is debated. On the one hand, visual networks of blind people respond to higher cognitive information, such as sentence grammar, suggesting drastic repurposing. On the other, in line with 'metamodal' accounts, sighted and blind populations show shared domain preferences in ventral occipito-temporal cortex (vOTC), suggesting visual areas switch input modality but perform the same or similar perceptual functions (e.g., face recognition) in blindness. Here we bring these disparate literatures together, reviewing and synthesizing evidence that speaks to whether visual cortices have similar or different functions in blind and sighted people. Together, the evidence suggests that in blindness, visual cortices are incorporated into higher-cognitive (e.g., fronto-parietal) networks, which are a major source long-range input to the visual system. We propose the connectivity-constrained experience-dependent account. Functional development is constrained by innate anatomical connectivity, experience and behavioral needs. Infant cortex is pluripotent, the same anatomical constraints develop into different functional outcomes.

A high-density diffuse optical tomography dataset of naturalistic viewing

Traditional laboratory tasks offer tight experimental control but lack the richness of our everyday human experience. As a result many cognitive neuroscientists have been motivated to adopt experimental paradigms that are more natural, such as stories and movies. Here we describe data collected from 58 healthy adult participants (aged 18-76 years) who viewed 10 minutes of a movie (The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, 1966). Most (36) participants viewed the clip more than once, resulting in 106 sessions of data. Cortical responses were mapped using high-density diffuse optical tomography (first- through fourth nearest neighbor separations of 1.3, 3.0, 3.9, and 4.7 cm), covering large portions of superficial occipital, temporal, parietal, and frontal lobes. Consistency of measured activity across subjects was quantified using intersubject correlation analysis. Data are provided in both channel format (SNIRF) and projected to standard space (NIfTI), using an atlas-based light model. These data are suitable for methods exploration as well as investigating a wide variety of cognitive phenomena.

Do blind people hear better?

For centuries, anecdotal evidence such as the perfect pitch of the blind piano tuner or blind musician has supported the notion that individuals who have lost their sight early in life have superior hearing abilities compared with sighted people. Recently, auditory psychophysical and functional imaging studies have identified that specific auditory enhancements in the early blind can be linked to activation in extrastriate visual cortex, suggesting crossmodal plasticity. Furthermore, the nature of the sensory reorganization in occipital cortex supports the concept of a task-based functional cartography for the cerebral cortex rather than a sensory-based organization. In total, studies of early-blind individuals provide valuable insights into mechanisms of cortical plasticity and principles of cerebral organization.

Naturalistic stimuli reveal a sensitive period in cross modal responses of visual cortex: Evidence from adult-onset blindness

How do life experiences impact cortical function? In people who are born blind, the "visual" cortices are recruited during nonvisual tasks, such as Braille reading and sound localization. Do visual cortices have a latent capacity to respond to nonvisual information throughout the lifespan? Alternatively, is there a sensitive period of heightened plasticity that makes visual cortex repurposing especially possible during childhood? To gain insight into these questions, we leveraged meaningful naturalistic auditory stimuli to simultaneously engage a broad range of cognitive domains and quantify cross-modal responses across congenitally blind (n = 22), adult-onset blind (vision loss >18 years-of-age, n = 14) and sighted (n = 22) individuals. During fMRI scanning, participants listened to two types of meaningful naturalistic auditory stimuli: excerpts from movies and a spoken narrative. As controls, participants heard the same narrative with the sentences shuffled and the narrative played backwards (i.e., meaningless sounds). We correlated the voxel-wise timecourses of different participants within condition and group. For all groups, all stimulus conditions induced synchrony in auditory cortex while only the narrative stimuli synchronized responses in higher-cognitive fronto-parietal and temporal regions. As previously reported, inter-subject synchrony in visual cortices was higher in congenitally blind than sighted blindfolded participants and this between-group difference was particularly pronounced for meaningful stimuli (movies and narrative). Critically, visual cortex synchrony was no higher in adult-onset blind than sighted blindfolded participants and did not increase with blindness duration. Sensitive period plasticity enables cross-modal repurposing in visual cortices.

Naturalistic Audio-Movies reveal common spatial organization across "visual" cortices of different blind individuals

Occipital cortices of different sighted people contain analogous maps of visual information (e.g. foveal vs. peripheral). In congenital blindness, "visual" cortices respond to nonvisual stimuli. Do visual cortices of different blind people represent common informational maps? We leverage naturalistic stimuli and inter-subject pattern similarity analysis to address this question. Blindfolded sighted (n = 22) and congenitally blind (n = 22) participants listened to 6 sound clips (5-7 min each): 3 auditory excerpts from movies; a naturalistic spoken narrative; and matched degraded auditory stimuli (Backwards Speech, scrambled sentences), during functional magnetic resonance imaging scanning. We compared the spatial activity patterns evoked by each unique 10-s segment of the different auditory excerpts across blind and sighted people. Segments of meaningful naturalistic stimuli produced distinctive activity patterns in frontotemporal networks that were shared across blind and across sighted individuals. In the blind group only, segment-specific, cross-subject patterns emerged in visual cortex, but only for meaningful naturalistic stimuli and not Backwards Speech. Spatial patterns of activity within visual cortices are sensitive to time-varying information in meaningful naturalistic auditory stimuli in a broadly similar manner across blind individuals.

The "Narratives" fMRI dataset for evaluating models of naturalistic language comprehension

The "Narratives" collection aggregates a variety of functional MRI datasets collected while human subjects listened to naturalistic spoken stories. The current release includes 345 subjects, 891 functional scans, and 27 diverse stories of varying duration totaling ~4.6 hours of unique stimuli (~43,000 words). This data collection is well-suited for naturalistic neuroimaging analysis, and is intended to serve as a benchmark for models of language and narrative comprehension. We provide standardized MRI data accompanied by rich metadata, preprocessed versions of the data ready for immediate use, and the spoken story stimuli with time-stamped phoneme- and word-level transcripts. All code and data are publicly available with full provenance in keeping with current best practices in transparent and reproducible neuroimaging.

Towards Strong Inference in Research on Embodiment - Possibilities and Limitations of Causal Paradigms

A central question in the cognitive sciences is which role embodiment plays for high-level cognitive functions, such as conceptual processing. Here, we propose that one reason why progress regarding this question has been slow is a lacking focus on what Platt (1964) called “strong inference”. Strong inference is possible when results from an experimental paradigm are not merely consistent with a hypothesis, but they provide decisive evidence for one particular hypothesis compared to competing hypotheses. We discuss how causal paradigms, which test the functional relevance of sensory-motor processes for high-level cognitive functions, can move the field forward. In particular, we explore how congenital sensory-motor disorders, acquired sensory-motor deficits, and interference paradigms with healthy participants can be utilized as an opportunity to better understand the role of sensory experience in conceptual processing. Whereas all three approaches can bring about valuable insights, we highlight that the study of congenitally and acquired sensorimotor disorders is particularly effective in the case of conceptual domains with strong unimodal basis (e.g., colors), whereas interference paradigms with healthy participants have a broader application, avoid many of the practical and interpretational limitations of patient studies, and allow a systematic and step-wise progressive inference approach to causal mechanisms.

Lack of selectivity for syntax relative to word meanings throughout the language network

To understand what you are reading now, your mind retrieves the meanings of words and constructions from a linguistic knowledge store (lexico-semantic processing) and identifies the relationships among them to construct a complex meaning (syntactic or combinatorial processing). Do these two sets of processes rely on distinct, specialized mechanisms or, rather, share a common pool of resources? Linguistic theorizing, empirical evidence from language acquisition and processing, and computational modeling have jointly painted a picture whereby lexico-semantic and syntactic processing are deeply inter-connected and perhaps not separable. In contrast, many current proposals of the neural architecture of language continue to endorse a view whereby certain brain regions selectively support syntactic/combinatorial processing, although the locus of such "syntactic hub", and its nature, vary across proposals. Here, we searched for selectivity for syntactic over lexico-semantic processing using a powerful individual-subjects fMRI approach across three sentence comprehension paradigms that have been used in prior work to argue for such selectivity: responses to lexico-semantic vs. morpho-syntactic violations (Experiment 1); recovery from neural suppression across pairs of sentences differing in only lexical items vs. only syntactic structure (Experiment 2); and same/different meaning judgments on such sentence pairs (Experiment 3). Across experiments, both lexico-semantic and syntactic conditions elicited robust responses throughout the left fronto-temporal language network. Critically, however, no regions were more strongly engaged by syntactic than lexico-semantic processing, although some regions showed the opposite pattern. Thus, contra many current proposals of the neural architecture of language, syntactic/combinatorial processing is not separable from lexico-semantic processing at the level of brain regions-or even voxel subsets-within the language network, in line with strong integration between these two processes that has been consistently observed in behavioral and computational language research. The results further suggest that the language network may be generally more strongly concerned with meaning than syntactic form, in line with the primary function of language-to share meanings across minds.

Lack of selectivity for syntax relative to word meanings throughout the language network

To understand what you are reading now, your mind retrieves the meanings of words and constructions from a linguistic knowledge store (lexico-semantic processing) and identifies the relationships among them to construct a complex meaning (syntactic or combinatorial processing). Do these two sets of processes rely on distinct, specialized mechanisms or, rather, share a common pool of resources? Linguistic theorizing, empirical evidence from language acquisition and processing, and computational modeling have jointly painted a picture whereby lexico-semantic and syntactic processing are deeply inter-connected and perhaps not separable. In contrast, many current proposals of the neural architecture of language continue to endorse a view whereby certain brain regions selectively support syntactic/combinatorial processing, although the locus of such "syntactic hub", and its nature, vary across proposals. Here, we searched for selectivity for syntactic over lexico-semantic processing using a powerful individual-subjects fMRI approach across three sentence comprehension paradigms that have been used in prior work to argue for such selectivity: responses to lexico-semantic vs. morpho-syntactic violations (Experiment 1); recovery from neural suppression across pairs of sentences differing in only lexical items vs. only syntactic structure (Experiment 2); and same/different meaning judgments on such sentence pairs (Experiment 3). Across experiments, both lexico-semantic and syntactic conditions elicited robust responses throughout the left fronto-temporal language network. Critically, however, no regions were more strongly engaged by syntactic than lexico-semantic processing, although some regions showed the opposite pattern. Thus, contra many current proposals of the neural architecture of language, syntactic/combinatorial processing is not separable from lexico-semantic processing at the level of brain regions-or even voxel subsets-within the language network, in line with strong integration between these two processes that has been consistently observed in behavioral and computational language research. The results further suggest that the language network may be generally more strongly concerned with meaning than syntactic form, in line with the primary function of language-to share meanings across minds.