Cited by 205Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismPhonetics and Phonology ResearchVoice and Speech Disorders

An fMRI investigation of covertly and overtly produced mono- and multisyllabic words

SHUSTER, L, LEMIEUX, S·2005·Brain and Language

Abstract

Studies suggest that the left insula may play an important role in speech motor programming. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate the role of the left insula in the production of monosyllabic or multisyllabic words during overt and covert speech conditions. The left insula did not show a BOLD response for multisyllabic words (which should require more speech motor programming) that was different from that for monosyllabic words. Left parietal lobe regions showed a greater response for multisyllabic as compared to monosyllabic words. This is consistent with clinical studies showing that left parietal lobe lesions can produce a deficit in speech programming. Despite similarities, covert and overt speech did not demonstrate the same patterns of BOLD response. The BOLD response was greater during overt speech in areas that have been shown to play an important role in speech production including left premotor cortex/BA6, left primary motor cortex, left insula, and left superior temporal gyrus.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bandl.2004.07.007

Cites

6 of 6 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?

  • Previous data suggest that inner and overt speech share neural generators.

    “While previous data suggest that inner and overt speech share neural generators, relatively few neurophysiological studies have explored the extent to which these two processes are functionally equivalent.”

    From Neurophysiological evidence of efference copies to inner speech (2017) · cites this paper as Shuster and Lemieux, 2005

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
SHUSTER, L., & LEMIEUX, S.
Affiliations
West Virginia University (US)
Corresponding author
SHUSTER, L
Venue
Brain and Language
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-04
Volume
93
Issue
1
Pages
20-31
ISSN
0093-934X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1971583361
Cited by
205
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 15
FWCI
2.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain and Language (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Voice and Speech Disorders
Keywords
left insula, covert speech, overt speech, polysyllabic words, monosyllabic words, left parietal lobe, speech production, BOLD signal, premotor cortex, primary motor cortex, superior temporal gyrus
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Adult, Cerebral Cortex, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Motor Cortex, Parietal Lobe, Speech, Temporal Lobe, Head Movements

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