The neuropsychology of visual mental

imagery

Paolo Bartolomeo

U. 610 Fédération de Neurologie

Domains of visual mental imagery

• Shapes of objects• Colors of objects• Faces• Letters• Spatial relationships

Goldenberg, Baillière's Clinical Neurology 2:265-86, 1993

Bisiach & Luzzatti, Cortex 14:129-33, 1978

Bartolomeo, D’Erme & Gainotti, Neurology 44:1710-4, 1994

Bartolomeo, D’Erme & Gainotti, Neurology 44:1710-4, 1994

Bartolomeo, D’Erme & Gainotti, Neurology 44:1710-4, 1994

Bartolomeo, D’Erme & Gainotti, Neurology 44:1710-4, 1994

?

29%71%

Imaginal + visualVisual only

Visual, non imaginal

• Anderson, 1993• Bartolomeo et al., 1994• Coslett, 1997

Imaginal, non visual• Guariglia et al., 1993• Beschin et al., 1997• Coslett, 1997• Ortigue et al., 2001

00.5

11.5

22.5

33.5

44.5

12 20 255

Time after onset (days)

imaginal scoreimaginal cutoffvisual scorevisual cutoff

Rig

htw

ard

bias

Patient GSPatient GS

Bartolomeo, D’Erme & Gainotti(see Bartolomeo & Chokron, in Handbook of Neuropsychology 2nd ed., 2001)

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

8 15 22 84

Time after onset (days)

imaginal scoreimaginal cutoffvisual scorevisual cutoff

Rig

htw

ard

bias

Patient AMPatient AM

Bartolomeo, D’Erme & Gainotti(see Bartolomeo & Chokron, in Handbook of Neuropsychology 2nd ed., 2001)

Place descriptions haveproblems

1. How to be sure that patients are using visual mental imagery, and not verbal-propositional knowledge?

2. Idiosyncratic responses are possible (e.g., patients’places of residency or vacation)

3. There is a strong influence of pre-morbid cultural level

4. Often, too few items are available for statistical analysis

5. How to know where patients put the centre of theirmental images?

Paris…BORDEAUX

mmhmmh…… LEFT!LEFT!

Bartolomeo, Bachoud-Lévi, Azouvi, & Chokron, Neuropsychologia, 43:1249-57, 2005

R: 712 ± 153 msL: 703 ± 248 ms

12 normal controls

Bartolomeo, Bachoud-Lévi, Azouvi, & Chokron, Neuropsychologia, 43:1249-57, 2005

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

RTs

(ms)

CTR RBD N+ RBD N-

geo Lgeo Rresp Lresp R

12 RBD patients (7 N+)

Bartolomeo, Bachoud-Lévi, Azouvi, & Chokron, Neuropsychologia, 43:1249-57, 2005

PATIENTS

-1.2

-0.8

-0.4

0

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

N-5 N-4 N-3

N+5

N+2

N-1

N+7

N+3

N-2

N+6

N+4

N+1

(LW

bia

s <-

) Lat

eral

ity s

core

(->

RW

bia

s)

Resp. biasGeo

Single-case analysis

Bartolomeo, Bachoud-Lévi, Azouvi, & Chokron, Neuropsychologia, 43:1249-57, 2005

Chokron, Colliot & Bartolomeo, Cortex, 40:281-90, 2004

Rode, Perenin & Boisson, Rev Neurol 151:161-4, 1995

CONTROLS(n=8)

EYES OPEN EYES CLOSED

Rode, Revol, Rossetti, Boisson & Bartolomeo, Neurology 68:432-7, 2007

NEGLECT PATIENTS(n=8)

EYES OPEN EYES CLOSED

Rode, Revol, Rossetti, Boisson & Bartolomeo, Neurology 68:432-7, 2007

long-term visual memorygenerate

IMAGERY

visualbuffer

PERCEPTION

encode

Farah, Cognition 18:245-72, 1984

Penfield & Perot, 1963

Lee et al., 2000

Support to the model:

• Association of perceptual and imagerydeficits

Farah, Psychol Rev 95:307-17, 1988

But:

• Since the ’90, reports of double dissociations

Bartolomeo, Cortex 38:357-78, 2002

long-term visual memorygenerate

IMAGERY

visualbuffer

PERCEPTION

encode

Farah, Cognition 18:245-72, 1984

long-term visual memorygenerate

IMAGERY

visualbuffer

PERCEPTION

encode

Kosslyn, Image and Brain, 1994

Patient HJA

Humphreys & Riddoch, To see but not to see, 1987

• visual object agnosia

• prosopagnosia• alexia• achromatopsia• topographical

impairment

1982 1997

HJA: Drawings from memory

1982 1997

HJA: Drawings from memory

Riddoch, Humphreys, Gannon, Blott& Jones, Brain 122:537-59, 1999

Riddoch et al., 1999

• « The conclusion that visual memory is intact in cases of apperceptive agnosia is perhaps premature »

• « Our data are quite consistent with the notion that visual perception and long-term visual memory utilize common neural strata (e.g., in imagery tasks) »

Patient MD

R

Jankowiak, Kinsbourne, Shalev & Bachman, J Cogn Neurosci 4:119-31, 1992

Aglioti, Bricolo, Cantagallo, & Berlucchi, Curr Biol 9:1419-22, 1999

Patient CK

• visual object agnosia• alexia• intact face recognition• intact color perception

Behrmann, Moscovitch & Winocur, J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 20:1068-87,1994

Madame D

• visual object agnosia• alexia without agraphia• achromatopsia• prosopagnosia

Bartolomeo, Bachoud-Lévi, de Gelder, Denes, Dalla Barba, Brugières & Degos, Neuropsychologia 36:239-49,1998

R

Bartolomeo, Bachoud-Lévi, de Gelder, Denes, Dalla Barba, Brugières & Degos, Neuropsychologia 36:239-49,1998

Madame D

Madame D: Objects

Perception• Overlapping figures

13/30• Picture matching 11/20• Pointing to pictures 7/20• Picture naming 133/247• Shape naming 10/10

Imagery• High-imagery

sentences 16/18• Animal size 18/19• Object form 24/24

Bartolomeo, Bachoud-Lévi, de Gelder, Denes, Dalla Barba, Brugières & Degos, Neuropsychologia 36:239-49,1998

Madame D: Letters

Perception• Word reading 156/400• Letter reading 22/52

Imagery• Word imagery 100/100• Lowercase letter imagery

26/26• Uppercase letter imagery

26/26• Uppercase letter construction

26/26

Bartolomeo, Bachoud-Lévi, de Gelder, Denes, Dalla Barba, Brugières & Degos, Neuropsychologia 36:239-49,1998

Madame D: Colors

Perception• Farnsworth D-15 17/32• Ishihara plates 6/36• Colour matching 6/20• Colour pointing 8/20• Colour naming 8/40

Imagery• Colour verbal memory 20/20• Verbo-visuo-verbal test

15/15• Mental hue comparison

24/25

Bartolomeo, Bachoud-Lévi, de Gelder, Denes, Dalla Barba, Brugières & Degos, Neuropsychologia 36:239-49,1998

Madame D: Faces

Perception• Gender decision 12/20• Age decision 11/30• Facial decision 14/20• Facial features 5/27• Recognition of

celebrities 1/80• Gender decision 12/20• Age decision 11/30

Imagery• Overall similarity 15/15• Specific properties

14/15• Triads similarities 30/30• Triads properties 24/24

Bartolomeo, Bachoud-Lévi, de Gelder, Denes, Dalla Barba, Brugières & Degos, Neuropsychologia 36:239-49,1998

long-term visual memorygenerate

IMAGERY

visualbuffer

PERCEPTION

encode

RBartolomeo, Bachoud-Lévi, Chokron & Degos, Neuropsychologia 40:1363-71, 2002

Patient VSB

• Letter construction: 5/26• Letter imagery (presence of curved

lines): 35/56• Word imagery (presence of ascenders,

b, h; or descenders, p, g): 22/40

Bartolomeo, Bachoud-Lévi, Chokron & Degos, Neuropsychologia 40:1363-71, 2002

Patient VSB

Conclusions - I

• Every type of dissociation is possible between the different perceptual and imagery abilities

• Extensive left temporal lobe damage seems necessary in order to produce visual imagery deficits for object form or orthographic material

Conclusions - II

• Occipital damage can determine perceptual deficits, but it seems neither necessary, nor sufficient to produce imagery deficits

• This functional and anatomical evidence challenges the Kosslyn model