Evidence for developmental changes in the visual word processing network beyond adolescence
Abstract
Late development of specialization in the visual word processing system was examined using event-related potentials (ERP) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) of word and symbol string processing in groups of adolescents (15.2-17.3 years) and adults (19.8-30.8 years). We focused our ERP analyses on fast visual activity: the occipital P1 (82-131 ms) modulated by physical stimulus characteristics and the occipito-temporal N1 (132-256 ms) reflecting visual tuning for print. Our fMRI analyses concentrated on basal occipito-temporal activations in the visual word form area VWFA. For words, the correlation of fMRI activation in the VWFA and N1 amplitude confirmed the close relationship of the electrophysiological N1 with metabolic activity in the VWFA. Further support for this relationship came from low resolution electromagnetic tomography localizing the word-specific N1 near the VWFA. Both imaging techniques revealed age-independent differences between words and symbol strings. Late development, however, was preferentially detected with ERPs. Decreases of P1 and N1 amplitudes with age were not limited to words and suggested further maturation of the underlying brain microstructure and function. Following adolescence, decreasing N1 latencies specific to words point to continued specialization of the visual word processing system. Both N1 and fMRI measures correlated with reading performance. In summary, the similarity of global fMRI activation patterns between groups suggests a fully established distribution of the reading network in adolescence, while the decreasing N1 latencies for words indicate protracted fine tuning after adolescence.
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?
Variability in fMRI findings around the occipito-temporal sulcus is unlikely to be caused by differences between orthographic systems.
“Differences between orthographic systems are unlikely to be the reason for this variability in fMRI results, because there are both negative and positive results in both German (compare Brem et al., 2006 with Kronbichler et al., 2006) and English (compare Church et al., 2008 with Turkeltaub et al., 2003).”
From The Development of Cortical Sensitivity to Visual Word Forms (2011) · cites this paper as Brem et al., 2006
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 95 · Cited by 219
- Authors
- Brem, S., Bucher, K., Halder, P., Summers, P., Dietrich, T., Martin, E., & Brandeis, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Zurich (CH)
- University Hospital Zurich (CH)
- University Children's Hospital Zurich (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Brandeis, Daniel
- Venue
- NeuroImage
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2006-02
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 822-837
- ISSN
- 1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2028136459
- Semantic Scholar
- 805296a0b2cbd3c8d564a1593c8f7d33cf383227
- Cited by
- 219
- References
- 95
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 14.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Keywords
- visual word processing, reading network, visual word form area, N1 component, P1 component, occipitotemporal cortex, brain maturation, adolescence, adult reading, reading achievement, LORETA
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Electroencephalography, Electrophysiology, Evoked Potentials, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Mental Processes, Nerve Net, Occipital Lobe, Photic Stimulation, Psychomotor Performance, Reading, Temporal Lobe, Artifacts
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