Cited by 200Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismPhonetics and Phonology ResearchLanguage Development and Disorders

The integration of large-scale neural network modeling and functional brain imaging in speech motor control

Open access
Golfinopoulos, E., Tourville, J.A., Guenther, F.H.·2010·NeuroImage

Abstract

Speech production demands a number of integrated processing stages. The system must encode the speech motor programs that command movement trajectories of the articulators and monitor transient spatiotemporal variations in auditory and somatosensory feedback. Early models of this system proposed that independent neural regions perform specialized speech processes. As technology advanced, neuroimaging data revealed that the dynamic sensorimotor processes of speech require a distributed set of interacting neural regions. The DIVA (Directions into Velocities of Articulators) neurocomputational model elaborates on early theories, integrating existing data and contemporary ideologies, to provide a mechanistic account of acoustic, kinematic, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data on speech acquisition and production. This large-scale neural network model is composed of several interconnected components whose cell activities and synaptic weight strengths are governed by differential equations. Cells in the model are associated with neuroanatomical substrates and have been mapped to locations in Montreal Neurological Institute stereotactic space, providing a means to compare simulated and empirical fMRI data. The DIVA model also provides a computational and neurophysiological framework within which to interpret and organize research on speech acquisition and production in fluent and dysfluent child and adult speakers. The purpose of this review article is to demonstrate how the DIVA model is used to motivate and guide functional imaging studies. We describe how model predictions are evaluated using voxel-based, region-of-interest-based parametric analyses and inter-regional effective connectivity modeling of fMRI data.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.10.023

Cites

98 of 98 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Jaw perturbations during speech increase activation in left and right ventral motor cortex, inferior frontal cortex, and inferior posterior cerebellum (lobule VIII).

    “and the consequences of this on compensatory speech motor commands were considered by Golfinopoulos et al. (2010) who found that jaw perturbations during speech increased activation in the left and right ventral motor cortex, inferior frontal cortex and inferior posterior cerebellum (lobule VIII).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Ghosh SS Understanding cortical and cerebellar contributions to speech production through modeling and functional imaging PhD thesis 2005 Boston University Boston, MA
  2. Gracco VL Peters H Hultsijn W Starkweather CW Sensorimotor mechanisms in speech motor control Speech Motor Control and Stuttering 1991 53 78 Elsevier North Holland
  3. McNeil MR Robin DA Schmidt RA Apraxia of speech: Definition and differential diagnosis 2007 Thieme New York 2nd ed.
  4. Robin DA Guenther FH Narayana S Jacks A Tourville JA Ramage AE Lancaster JL Franklin C Ghosh S Fox PT A transcranial magnetic stimulation virtual lesion study of speech 2008 Proceedings of the Conference on Motor Speech Monterey, California

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Golfinopoulos, E., Tourville, J. A., & Guenther, F. H.
Affiliations
Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
Golfinopoulos, E.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-09
Volume
52
Issue
3
Pages
862-874
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1977059764
Cited by
200
References
98
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 14
FWCI
4.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Deafness and other Communication Disorders (R01 DC02852)
  • National Center for Research Resources (P41RR14075)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
Keywords
speech motor control, DIVA model, neural network model, speech production, speech development, articulatory kinematics, sensorimotor integration, effective connectivity, region of interest analysis
MeSH terms
Brain Mapping, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Models, Neurological, Speech, Speech Production Measurement, Neural Networks, Computer

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