Relation between brain activation and lexical performance
Open accessAbstract
Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was used to determine whether performance on lexical tasks was correlated with cerebral activation patterns. We found that such relationships did exist and that their anatomical distribution reflected the neurocognitive processing routes required by the task. Better performance on intramodal tasks (determining if visual words were spelled the same or if auditory words rhymed) was correlated with more activation in unimodal regions corresponding to the modality of sensory input, namely the fusiform gyrus (BA 37) for written words and the superior temporal gyrus (BA 22) for spoken words. Better performance in tasks requiring cross-modal conversions (determining if auditory words were spelled the same or if visual words rhymed), on the other hand, was correlated with more activation in posterior heteromodal regions, including the supramarginal gyrus (BA 40) and the angular gyrus (BA 39). Better performance in these cross-modal tasks was also correlated with greater activation in unimodal regions corresponding to the target modality of the conversion process (i.e., fusiform gyrus for auditory spelling and superior temporal gyrus for visual rhyming). In contrast, performance on the auditory spelling task was inversely correlated with activation in the superior temporal gyrus possibly reflecting a greater emphasis on the properties of the perceptual input rather than on the relevant transmodal conversions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Four additional studies used a baseline in which participants matched visual symbols.
“Four additional studies utilised a baseline in which participants matched visual symbols (Aparicio et al., 2007; Booth et al., 2003; Hernandez et al., 2013; MacSweeney et al., 2009).”
From Bridging phenomenology and neural mechanisms of inner speech: ALE meta-analysis on egocentricity and spontaneity in a dual-mechanistic framework (2023) · cites this paper as Booth et al., 2003
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 72 · Cited by 147
- Authors
- Booth, J. R., Burman, D. D., Meyer, J. R., Gitelman, D. R., Parrish, T. B., & Mesulam, M. M.
- Affiliations
- Northwestern University (US)
- Venue
- Human Brain Mapping
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-04-23
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 155-169
- ISSN
- 1065-9471 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0193
- PMC
- PMC6871810
- OpenAlex
- W2086982363
- Cited by
- 147
- References
- 72
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 3.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Human Brain Mapping (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Santen
- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R21DC006149)
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD042049)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
- Keywords
- lexical processing, brain activation, spelling, fusiform gyrus, superior temporal gyrus, supramarginal gyrus, angular gyrus, visual word recognition, auditory word processing
- MeSH terms
- Acoustic Stimulation, Adult, Brain Mapping, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Language, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Photic Stimulation, Reaction Time, Reading, Speech, Task Performance and Analysis, Temporal Lobe
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review