Cited by 76Neuroscience and Music PerceptionNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismHearing Loss and Rehabilitation

Subject's own name as a novel in a MMN design: A combined ERP and PET study

Holeckova, Irena, Fischer, Catherine, Morlet, Dominique, Delpuech, Claude, Costes, Nicolas, Mauguière, François·2008·Brain Research

Abstract

With a view to elaborating a clinical tool to assess cognitive functions in brain-damaged patients, we had previously displayed characteristic patterns of ERPs (32 electrodes) in awake healthy persons in response to their own name (SON) presented as a novel in a passive oddball paradigm. In the present combined ERP and PET study, in an attempt to identify brain correlates of duration MMN and response to SON uttered by a familiar (FV) or an unknown voice (NFV), we used a block design protocol as close as possible to the aforementioned SON protocol. ERP data showed robust duration MMN and novelty P3 in response to SON similar to our previous results. The PET technique did not allow true MMN generators to be disclosed, but blocks with duration deviants elicited an increase of activation in the right temporal pole as compared with the control condition with no deviants, supporting the hypothesis of right hemispheric dominance in early sound discrimination. For SON contrasts, robust cerebral blood flow activation present over temporal, frontal and parietal cortices, in the hippocampus and in the precuneus could be associated with speech, novelty and self-recognition processing. Familiar and unfamiliar voices activated the prefrontal cortex differently, suggesting different retrieval processes, although corresponding ERP responses could not be differentiated.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brainres.2007.10.091

Cites

86 of 86 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Holeckova, I., Fischer, C., Morlet, D., Delpuech, C., Costes, N., & Mauguière, F.
Affiliations
  • Lyon 1 Université (FR)
  • Centre d'Exploration et de Recherche Médicale par Emission de Positons (FR)
Corresponding author
Fischer, Catherine
Venue
Brain Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-01
Volume
1189
Pages
152-165
ISSN
0006-8993 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2001350720
Cited by
76
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 9
FWCI
0.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Keywords
own name, P3, voice recognition, hemispheric dominance, sound discrimination, self-recognition, speech processing, hippocampus, precuneus, prefrontal cortex, cerebral blood flow
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Adult, Attention, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Cerebrovascular Circulation, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Exploratory Behavior, Humans, Language Tests, Functional Laterality, Male, Middle Aged, Nerve Net, Neuropsychological Tests, Speech Perception, Recognition, Psychology, Positron-Emission Tomography

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