Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Sep 9.
Published in final edited form as: J Neurosci. 2011 Mar 9;31(10):3743–3756. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4803-10.2011

Figure 6. MR activations for grasping observation in IPL and IPS.

Figure 6

A & B. Percent MR signal change (baseline: fixation-only condition) for observation of acting persons (A) and observation of isolated hand actions (B) and their scrambled and static controls in parietal ROIs: PF, PFG, PG and Opt on the IPL convexity and AIP and LIPa in the IPS. Group data from 3 monkeys (M3, M5, M6). C & D. Percent MR signal change (baseline: fixation-only condition) for observation of acting persons (C) and observation of isolated hand actions (D) and their scrambled and static controls in IPL and IPS ROIs. Single subject data (M15; 3T). No visually driven voxels were present in PF, compared to an average of 29% of the voxels in PFG (see suppl. text). Asterisks indicate a significantly stronger (p < 0.05, corr.) response to action observation compared to all controls. Error bars indicate variability over runs.