Proportion correct in the same-different task with upright Chinese characters by 120 non-readers and 29 readers of Chinese.

<p>The accuracies of the two groups were identical. Error bars are standard errors of the mean.</p

Proportion correct accuracies for the 21 native Chinese speakers, for the upright and inverted characters in the same-different matching task.

<p>All 21 participants except No.1 and No.16 showed a higher accuracy for the upright than for the inverted characters. The average difference was statistically significant, but was only 0.01 in proportion correct.</p

Scatter plots of proportion correct accuracies in the same-different matching task for upright and inverted characters for the 51 non-readers (top), and for the 105 readers (bottoms).

<p>The two correlations were statistically significant and comparable to each other.</p

Same-different matching accuracies with upright and inverted characters, from three native Chinese speakers who scored perfectly in the character recognition test.

<p>These three native speakers’ same-different matching accuracies were nevertheless not perfect.</p

Scatter plot from the 20 native speakers of their same-different matching accuracies with upright and inverted characters.

<p>The correlation coefficient was 0.84.</p

Proportion correct in the same-different matching for the zero, less, and more experienced participants, and for inverted and upright characters.

<p>The error bars represent standard error of the mean.</p

Scatter plots of upright (x-axis) vs. inverted (y-axis) same-different accuracies in proportion correct (left panel) and hit rates (right panel).

<p>Each panel shows the 25 occlusion conditions, each of which was averaged from the 105 readers.</p

The response of hMT+ (%BOLD change) pre and post training with counter-phase dots (filled bars) or in-phase dots (open/textured bars).

<p>* indicates a significant reduction in the activation of hMT+ for the counter-phase dot stimulus presented along the trained motion-axis. Post training data are collapsed across angle size (“same” and “smaller” angles) as there were no differences in the BOLD response for this variable.</p

A schematic representation of a single trial demonstrating a counter-clockwise change in motion axis about a bisecting motion axis of 45°.

<p>The bisecting axis is depicted with solid grey lines (not present in the real stimuli). The lower panel illustrates the two possible relative phases of dot motion. Counter-phase dots provided locally balanced motion directions and therefore putatively suppressed MT. In-phase dots did not have locally balanced motion signals and therefore MT was presumed to be activated normally. Arrows are shown for illustrative purposes only.</p

An outline of the experimental design<b>.</b>

<p>The main experiment employed protocol 1 whereby learning related changes in the response of hMT+ and V1 were compared between two groups, one trained on in-phase dots and the other trained on counter-phase dots. Protocol 2 applied only to the group trained on counter-phase dots and compared the response of hMT+ and V1 to in-phase vs. counter-phase dots pre and post training (within subjects). A total of 11 participants were trained on counter-phase dots and 6 completed both scanning protocols after training. Same angle refers to the angular difference in motion axis orientation that gave rise to 75% correct before training. Smaller angle refers to the angular difference corresponding to 75% correct after training.</p