On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 17:43:51 -0700, Joan Warmbold wrote:
> http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=one-face-one-neuron    
>
>Do folks recall the recall the research that focused on how one neuron in
>certain subjects was attuned to pictures of Halle Berry and/or Jennifer
>Ainston?  This study, which also refers to the "grandmother neuron," can
>be accessed through the above URL.  Simulutaneously amusing and amazing.

Bruce Goldstein in the 2nd edition of his Cognition text refers to 
this research and, invariably, after I argue why a single cell by itself
cannot be used to recognize a face, a student asks "but doesn't the
textbook say that there are Jennifer Aniston and Halle Barry detectors
in the brain?".  To which I reply:

(1)  The research that is reported is fairly recent and needs to be replicated
before we take it too seriously (I also point out the balancing act that
textbook author have to play:  one can cite "sexy" research to keep
undergraduates interested in the text but run the risk of failure to replicate
[Note to sea lions] and having to apologize for its use in subsequent 
editions or simply drop it without comment).  Reference for the article is:
R. Quian Quiroga et al. (23 Jun 2005)  Invariant visual representation by 
single neurons in the human brain. Nature 435, 7045 

(2)  I am unconvinced by the methodology because it appears to be
different from that used by Hubel & Wiesel and it is unclear to me how
individual neurons are being recorded (the electrodes are implanted as
part of a clinical program for treating epilepsy).  However, I admit that
this is argument based on ignorance.

(3)  Charles Connor, a neuroscientist writing in the same issue of Nature
(Nature 435, 1036 - 1037 (22 Jun 2005), doi: 10.1038/4351036a, News 
and Views) offers an interpretation that the "Aniston" cell is not responding
to the image of Jennifer (i.e., neural path representing different aspects
of the visual information are combined at the "Aniston" cell) but is instead
a general "memory" cell, that is,  the cell's behavior is influenced by
general information about Jennifer and not just by her image.  I admit that
I find this explanation only slightly more palatable than the "Aniston"
image responsive cell.

(4)  Finally, I say don't believe everything that you read in your textbooks.
I know that a certain amount of it is BS but the problem often is that we
don't know which parts are definitively BS.  So, (a) read the original
sources, (b) see if there is research that replicates the orginal findings,
and (c) who cites this research and what do they have to say (e.g., do
they use it to support an assertion or do they critically analyze the
research).

Sometimes I throw in a comment based on the following quote:

A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing opponents and 
making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, 
and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.  
~Max Planck, A Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers, 1949

-Mike Palij
New York University
[email protected]


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([email protected])

Reply via email to