Search

Neuroimaging studies of speech perception have consistently indicated a left-hemisphere dominance in the temporal lobes' responses to intelligible auditory speech signals (McGettigan and Scott, 2012). However, there are important communicative cues that cannot be extracted from auditory signals alone, including the direction of the talker's gaze. Previous work has implicated the superior temporal cortices in processing gaze direction, with evidence for predominantly right-lateralized responses (Carlin & Calder, 2013). The aim of the current study was to investigate whether the lateralization of responses to talker gaze differs in an auditory communicative context. Participants in a functional MRI experiment watched and listened to videos of spoken sentences in which the auditory intelligibility and talker gaze direction were manipulated factorially. We observed a left-dominant temporal lobe sensitivity to the talker's gaze direction, in which the left anterior superior temporal sulcus/gyrus and temporal pole showed an enhanced response to direct gaze - further investigation revealed that this pattern of lateralization was modulated by auditory intelligibility. Our results suggest flexibility in the distribution of neural responses to social cues in the face within the context of a challenging speech perception task., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Unlabelled: Faces are salient social stimuli whose features attract a stereotypical pattern of fixations. The implications of this gaze behavior for perception and brain activity are largely unknown. Here, we characterize and quantify a retinotopic bias implied by typical gaze behavior toward faces, which leads to eyes and mouth appearing most often in the upper and lower visual field, respectively. We found that the adult human visual system is tuned to these contingencies. In two recognition experiments, recognition performance for isolated face parts was better when they were presented at typical, rather than reversed, visual field locations. The recognition cost of reversed locations was equal to ∼60% of that for whole face inversion in the same sample. Similarly, an fMRI experiment showed that patterns of activity evoked by eye and mouth stimuli in the right inferior occipital gyrus could be separated with significantly higher accuracy when these features were presented at typical, rather than reversed, visual field locations. Our findings demonstrate that human face perception is determined not only by the local position of features within a face context, but by whether features appear at the typical retinotopic location given normal gaze behavior. Such location sensitivity may reflect fine-tuning of category-specific visual processing to retinal input statistics. Our findings further suggest that retinotopic heterogeneity might play a role for face inversion effects and for the understanding of conditions affecting gaze behavior toward faces, such as autism spectrum disorders and congenital prosopagnosia., Significance Statement: Faces attract our attention and trigger stereotypical patterns of visual fixations, concentrating on inner features, like eyes and mouth. Here we show that the visual system represents face features better when they are shown at retinal positions where they typically fall during natural vision. When facial features were shown at typical (rather than reversed) visual field locations, they were discriminated better by humans and could be decoded with higher accuracy from brain activity patterns in the right occipital face area. This suggests that brain representations of face features do not cover the visual field uniformly. It may help us understand the well-known face-inversion effect and conditions affecting gaze behavior toward faces, such as prosopagnosia and autism spectrum disorders., (Copyright © 2016 de Haas et al.)

Human beings have remarkable social attention skills. From the initial processing of cues, such as eye gaze, head direction, and body orientation, we perceive where other people are attending, allowing us to draw inferences about the intentions, desires, and dispositions of others. But before we can infer why someone is attending to something in the world we must first accurately represent where they are attending. Here we investigate the "where" of social attention perception, and employ adaptation paradigms to ascertain how head and body orientation are visually represented in the human brain. Across two experiments we show that the representation of two cues to social attention (head and body orientation) exists at the category-specific level. This suggests that aftereffects do not arise from "social attention cells" discovered in macaques or from abstract representations of "leftness" or "rightness."

Head direction is a salient cue to the focus of other people's attention. Electrophysiology in macaques has shown head-selective cells in the superior temporal sulcus that are mostly tuned to different directions (up, down, left, right, front, back, etc.). However, there has been no systematic investigation into the visual representation of head direction in both the horizontal (left-right) and vertical (up-down) planes in humans. We addressed whether the coding of head direction is best accounted for by a multichannel system, with distinct pools of cells (or channels) tuned to different head views (i.e., left, right, direct, up, and down), or an opponent-coding system with two broadly tuned pools of cells responding to two extremes (i.e., left-right and up-down) and "direct" represented as the equilibrium state in the system. In a series of four experiments, we carried out two adaptation procedures for which multichannel and opponent coding predict distinct outcomes. The results support multichannel coding of head direction in both the vertical and horizontal axes.