Cited by 102Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismLanguage Development and DisordersReading and Literacy Development

Dissociable patterns of brain activity during comprehension of rapid and syntactically complex speech: Evidence from fMRI

Peelle, Jonathan E., McMillan, Corey, Moore, Peachie, Grossman, Murray, Wingfield, Arthur·2004·Brain and Language

Abstract

Sentence comprehension is a complex task that involves both language-specific processing components and general cognitive resources. Comprehension can be made more difficult by increasing the syntactic complexity or the presentation rate of a sentence, but it is unclear whether the same neural mechanism underlies both of these effects. In the current study, we used event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to monitor neural activity while participants heard sentences containing a subject-relative or object-relative center-embedded clause presented at three different speech rates. Syntactically complex object-relative sentences activated left inferior frontal cortex across presentation rates, whereas sentences presented at a rapid rate recruited frontal brain regions such as anterior cingulate and premotor cortex, regardless of syntactic complexity. These results suggest that dissociable components of a large-scale neural network support the processing of syntactic complexity and speech presented at a rapid rate during auditory sentence processing.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bandl.2004.05.007

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Peelle, J. E., McMillan, C., Moore, P., Grossman, M., & Wingfield, A.
Affiliations
  • Brandeis University (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Wingfield, Arthur
Venue
Brain and Language
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-12
Volume
91
Issue
3
Pages
315-325
ISSN
0093-934X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2096990725
Cited by
102
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 9
FWCI
2.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain and Language (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • W. M. Keck Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Aging (AG15516, R37-AG-04517, R37AG004517)
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (F31DC006376)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
sentence comprehension, syntactic complexity, speech rate, relative clauses, auditory language processing, left inferior frontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, premotor cortex, rapid speech
MeSH terms
Adult, Auditory Cortex, Cognition, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Speech, Speech Perception

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