Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Stimuli and trial timings. A, Object cues used in the ERP experiment and their target words on nonmatching trials. On matching trials, targets were the names of each object. B, Trial timing in the ERP experiment. Olfactory or visual object cues were followed by written word targets, each with a duration of 1 s with a variable interstimulus interval. C, Object cues used in the fMRI experiment. On matching trials, the object was paired with its name, and on nonmatching trials, the object was paired (one time each) with the names of the other seven objects. D, Trial timing in the fMRI experiment. Olfactory or visual object cues were followed by auditory word targets, each with an approximate duration of 1 s and a fixed 4 s interstimulus interval.
- Figure 2.
Behavioral results in ERP and fMRI experiments. Cue modality (olfactory, visual) is labeled below each set of bars, and cue–target congruency is indicated by color. Significant comparisons (p < 0.05) are indicated by an asterisk. A, Accuracy (mean ±SE) during the ERP experiment. Lower accuracy on matching and related odor trials, compared with other trial types, showed that participants were more likely to incorrectly reject the odors' names, and to falsely accept the names of other odors from the same semantic category, compared with picture trials. B, Response times (mean ± SE) in the ERP experiment were slower on odor trials than on picture trials and on nonmatching (related and unrelated) versus matching trials. C, In the fMRI experiment, accuracy was also lower on odor-cued compared with picture-cued trials. D, RTs in the fMRI experiment were slower on odor than picture trials and on nonmatching versus matching trials.
- Figure 3.
Results from the ERP experiment. A, Grand-averaged ERP waveforms for the experimental conditions, from midline electrodes in anterior, central, and posterior regions of the scalp. The N400 was of significantly higher amplitude to nonmatching versus matching targets in all regions, except in anterior electrodes on olfactory-cued trials (top left). B, Electrode clusters used to examine significance in each scalp region. C, Scalp topography of the N400 effect (nonmatch minus match amplitude) for odor-cued trials (left), picture-cued trials (middle), and the difference between the two (right). N400 effects were relatively larger in posterior locations on odor-cued trials and relatively larger in anterior locations on picture-cued trials.
- Figure 4.
Anatomical mask of the dorsomedial ATL, corresponding to the area receiving direct projections from primary olfactory cortex. Left, boundaries of the ATL mask are shown superimposed on a single coronal T1-weighted section of the normalized, single-participant canonical MRI scan from SPM5 [y = 20 in MNI (Montreal Neurological Institute) coordinate space]. Right, The dashed yellow rectangle corresponds to the area of ATL displayed in serial coronal sections of the mask, spanning its full extent from y = 28 (anterior) to y = 10 (posterior). See Materials and Methods for more details.
- Figure 5.
Results from the fMRI experiment. A, Right OFC activation for nonmatching > matching odor-cued trials. B, Right OFC interaction effect of cue modality* target word congruency (mean ± SE; condition-specific error bars adjusted for between-participants differences), indicating that cross-adaptation for matching trials was present in odor-cued but not in picture-cued conditions. C, Left ATL activation for nonmatching > matching odor-cued conditions. D, Left ATL interaction effect of cue modality by target word congruency, indicating that cross-adaptation for matching trials was present in odor-cued but not in picture-cued trials.
- Figure 6.
Time-series profiles of fMRI signal change, aligned to trial onset and normalized across conditions at time 0. A, Time-course peaks in right OFC show little difference between match and nonmatch trials in response to the odor cue itself (∼5 s) but diverge in response to subsequent presentation of the target word (arrow, ∼7.5 s). Minimal reactivity is seen in association with the picture-cued trials. *p < 0.05, one-tailed, significant interaction between modality and congruency. B, In left ATL, odor cue-evoked fMRI response peaks (∼5 s) give way to cross-adapting profiles for matching versus nonmatching conditions (*; ∼7.5 s), whereas fMRI response profiles for picture-cued conditions remain relatively unreactive.
In this issue
