2009 Alina Liberman: Difference between revisions
imported>Psych 204 Created page with 'Back to Psych 204 Projects 2009 = Project Title - Retinotopic maps in MNI space = Your project overview goes here. For example: Much of the visual co…' |
imported>Psych 204 No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Back to [[Psych204-Projects-2009 |Psych 204 Projects 2009]] | Back to [[Psych204-Projects-2009 |Psych 204 Projects 2009]] | ||
= | = Fusiform Face Are Development Throughout Adolescence = | ||
The Fusiform Face Area (FFA) is a region in the occipitotemporal cortex that preferentially responds more to visual face stimuli than place or object stimuli. In Golarai et al.(2007), they found that the right FFA was significantly smaller in children (ages 7-11) than adolescents (12-16) or adults (>18). This size difference was not present in the face-selective the superior temporal sulcus (STS) or the object-selective lateral occipital complex area (LOC). The place-selective parahippocampal place area (PPA) was also significantly smaller in children. These results support a region and category specific development of high-level visual cortex for faces and places. An ongoing follow-up study replicated the right FFA results, showing a significant size difference between adolescents (12-16) and adults(>18). The current study had better spatial resolution and did not use any spatial smoothing on the data. Since many developmental FFA studies report smoothed group data (Passarotti et al., 2003; Scherf et al., 2007), I wanted to ask the following questions: | |||
< | <ol> | ||
<li> How would these results change if the same data was spatially smoothed and normalized (i.e. location, response amplitudes, and size of ROIs)? | |||
<li> Would the significant age affect for the size of the right FFA survive? | |||
</ol> | |||
= Background = | = Background = | ||
Revision as of 00:22, 12 December 2009
Back to Psych 204 Projects 2009
Fusiform Face Are Development Throughout Adolescence
The Fusiform Face Area (FFA) is a region in the occipitotemporal cortex that preferentially responds more to visual face stimuli than place or object stimuli. In Golarai et al.(2007), they found that the right FFA was significantly smaller in children (ages 7-11) than adolescents (12-16) or adults (>18). This size difference was not present in the face-selective the superior temporal sulcus (STS) or the object-selective lateral occipital complex area (LOC). The place-selective parahippocampal place area (PPA) was also significantly smaller in children. These results support a region and category specific development of high-level visual cortex for faces and places. An ongoing follow-up study replicated the right FFA results, showing a significant size difference between adolescents (12-16) and adults(>18). The current study had better spatial resolution and did not use any spatial smoothing on the data. Since many developmental FFA studies report smoothed group data (Passarotti et al., 2003; Scherf et al., 2007), I wanted to ask the following questions:
- How would these results change if the same data was spatially smoothed and normalized (i.e. location, response amplitudes, and size of ROIs)?
- Would the significant age affect for the size of the right FFA survive?
Background
Below is another example of a reinotopic map in a different subject.
Figure 2
Once you upload the images, they look like this. Note that you can control many features of the images, like whether to show a thumbnail, and the display resolution.
Methods
Measuring object selective cortex
Lo maps were obtained in 5 subjects using two localizer scans
Subjects
Subjects were 14 healthy adolescents and 11 healthy adults .
MR acquisition
Data were obtained on a GE scanner.
MR Analysis
The MR data was analyzed using mrVista software tools.
Pre-processing
All data were slice-time corrected, motion corrected, and repeated scans were averaged together to create a single average scan for each subject. Et cetera.
GLM model fits
Results
Retinotopic models in native space
Some text. Some analysis. Some figures.
Conclusions
Here is where you say what your results mean.
References
Software