Cited by 112Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismNeuroscience and Music PerceptionFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies

Effective connectivity analysis demonstrates involvement of premotor cortex during speech perception

Osnes, Berge, Hugdahl, Kenneth, Specht, Karsten·2011·NeuroImage

Abstract

Several reports of premotor cortex involvement in speech perception have been put forward. Still, the functional role of premotor cortex is under debate. In order to investigate the functional role of premotor cortex, we presented parametrically varied speech stimuli in both a behavioral and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study. White noise was transformed over seven distinct steps into a speech sound and presented to the participants in a randomized order. As control condition served the same transformation from white noise into a music instrument sound. The fMRI data were modelled with Dynamic Causal Modeling (DCM) where the effective connectivity between Heschl's gyrus, planum temporale, superior temporal sulcus and premotor cortex were tested. The fMRI results revealed a graded increase in activation in the left superior temporal sulcus. Premotor cortex activity was only present at an intermediate step when the speech sounds became identifiable but were still distorted but was not present when the speech sounds were clearly perceivable. A Bayesian model selection procedure favored a model that contained significant interconnections between Heschl's gyrus, planum temporal, and superior temporal sulcus when processing speech sounds. In addition, bidirectional connections between premotor cortex and superior temporal sulcus and from planum temporale to premotor cortex were significant. Processing non-speech sounds initiated no significant connections to premotor cortex. Since the highest level of motor activity was observed only when processing identifiable sounds with incomplete phonological information, it is concluded that premotor cortex is not generally necessary for speech perception but may facilitate interpreting a sound as speech when the acoustic input is sparse.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.09.078

Cites

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 59 · Cited by 112

Authors
Osnes, B., Hugdahl, K., & Specht, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Bergen (NO)
  • Haukeland University Hospital (NO)
Corresponding author
Osnes, Berge
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-02
Volume
54
Issue
3
Pages
2437-2445
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1982286100
Cited by
112
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 10
FWCI
4.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Haukeland Universitetssjukehus
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
Keywords
premotor cortex, speech perception, effective connectivity, dynamic causal modeling, superior temporal sulcus, planum temporale, Heschl's gyrus, auditory cortex, phonological information, auditory-motor interaction
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Adult, Bayes Theorem, Brain Mapping, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Models, Neurological, Motor Cortex, Music, Neural Pathways, Noise, Speech Perception, Temporal Lobe, Linear Models

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