2009; see also Mechelli et al. 2007). BA 40 has been linked to the phonological store (Vigneau et al. 2006). The shared enhancement therefore may be attributed to the dual activation of lexical access, which includes semantic and phonological processing.

Furthermore, each distractor type with feature overlap to the target picture (phonologically or categorically related) revealed some activation in left middle frontal gyrus (BA 11). The orbitofrontal cortex, comprising BA 11 and 47, has been linked to semantic processing (Fiez 1997). Altogether, given the shared engagement of language Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical functions, repetition enhancements were largely distractor unspecific at our less conservative threshold. Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical There was no area characteristic for one distractor type; distractors revealed activations in inferior parietal gyrus, MTG, and/or middle frontal gyrus instead. Joint repetition suppression for distractor types Finally, we used conjunction analyses to investigate joint suppressions for distractor types. As a result, only a minor

cluster in right medial temporo-occipital gyrus associated with visual processing (Cabeza and Nyberg 2000) was commonly suppressed for Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical all distractor types as derived from conjunction analysis (legend of Table 4). Of course, there is no central “priming device” for interference in the brain. Moreover, both facilitatory distractors shared areas related to vision (bilateral occipitotemporal regions), semantic memory retrieval (bilateral IFG), conflict processing (bilateral ACC, right pre-SMA), and to a minor extent Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical memory processing (left parahippocampal gyrus) (Fig. 5). In cognitive terms, the impact of a facilitatory distractor has been attributed to the activation of a neighboring word that primes the target that is just being prepared in the naming network. While a phonologically Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical related word exerts its priming effect through overlapping phonological features (De Zubicaray et al. 2002), an associatively related word forwards activation to all semantically

connected words, among them the target name GBA3 (Sass et al. 2009). We intend to discuss neural correlates of facilitation successively. Several neuroimaging studies have identified left IFG as critical for the retrieval, selection, and identification of semantic information (Poldrack et al. 1999; Bookheimer 2002; Kotz et al. 2002; Vigneau et al. 2006). This area previously has been demonstrated to be commonly suppressed for categorical and phonological distractors compared to pure naming (De Zubicaray and McMahon 2009). A priming study demonstrated that the IFG is sensitive to the HIV Integrase inhibitor drugs establishment of stimulus-response associations (Horner and Henson 2008). Moreover, the behavioral effect in conceptual priming has shown to be associated with repetition suppression in left IFG (Wig et al. 2005; Orfanidou et al.