Should Damage to the Machinery of Social Perception Damage Perception?
Peter Carruthers, Vincent Picciuto
Cognitive Neuroscience June 1, 2011 DOI: 10.1080/17588928.2011.585229 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Commentary Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Key points | Argues that Graziano and Kastner are mistaken to claim that neglect favors their self-directed social perception account of consciousness, since that account should not predict neglect from damage to social perception mechanisms. Contends that neglect is better explained by damage to attentional mechanisms. |
Abstract
Abstract We argue that Graziano and Kastner are mistaken to claim that neglect favors their self-directed social perception account of consciousness. For the latter should not predict that neglect would result from damage to mechanisms of social perception. Neglect is better explained in terms of damage to attentional mechanisms.
Citations in the library
Cites 13
- A default mode of brain function Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences January 16, 2001
- Consciousness as Integrated Information: a Provisional Manifesto Biological Bulletin December 1, 2008
- Patterns of Brain Activity Supporting Autobiographical Memory, Prospection, and Theory of Mind, and Their Relationship to the Default Mode Network Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience July 6, 2009
- Opposing effects of attention and consciousness on afterimages Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences April 27, 2010
- Why the global availability of mind wandering necessitates resource competition: Reply to McVay and Kane (2010). Psychological Bulletin March 1, 2010
and 8 more in the library