CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 208Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismPhonetics and Phonology ResearchNeuroscience and Music Perception

Spatiotemporal dynamics of electrocorticographic high gamma activity during overt and covert word repetition

Open access
Pei, Xiaomei, Leuthardt, Eric C., Gaona, Charles M., Brunner, Peter, Wolpaw, Jonathan R., Schalk, Gerwin·2011·NeuroImage
DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.10.029PMC PMC3020260
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Language is one of the defining abilities of humans. Many studies have characterized the neural correlates of different aspects of language processing. However, the imaging techniques typically used in these studies were limited in either their temporal or spatial resolution. Electrocorticographic (ECoG) recordings from the surface of the brain combine high spatial with high temporal resolution and thus could be a valuable tool for the study of neural correlates of language function. In this study, we defined the spatiotemporal dynamics of ECoG activity during a word repetition task in nine human subjects. ECoG was recorded while each subject overtly or covertly repeated words that were presented either visually or auditorily. ECoG amplitudes in the high gamma (HG) band confidently tracked neural changes associated with stimulus presentation and with the subject's verbal response. Overt word production was primarily associated with HG changes in the superior and middle parts of temporal lobe, Wernicke's area, the supramarginal gyrus, Broca's area, premotor cortex (PMC), primary motor cortex. Covert word production was primarily associated with HG changes in superior temporal lobe and the supramarginal gyrus. Acoustic processing from both auditory stimuli as well as the subject's own voice resulted in HG power changes in superior temporal lobe and Wernicke's area. In summary, this study represents a comprehensive characterization of overt and covert speech using electrophysiological imaging with high spatial and temporal resolution. It thereby complements the findings of previous neuroimaging studies of language and thus further adds to current understanding of word processing in humans.

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.2010.10.029

Cites

58 of 58 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?

  • Neuroprosthetic studies using electrocorticography have shown that inner speech can be decoded from particular regions of the cortex but differ in their conclusions about which regions contribute.

    “Neuroprosthetic studies using electrocorticography (ECoG) have shown that inner speech can be decoded from particular regions of the cortex but differ in their conclusions about which regions contribute45,49–51.”

    From Inner speech in motor cortex and implications for speech neuroprostheses (2025) · cites this paper as [45]

    The Results (§3.3; page unavailable) identify ECoG high-gamma activity during covert word production in specific cortical regions, particularly posterior BA22, BA41/42 and BA40. But the Methods (§2.5; page unavailable) describe comparisons of task and rest or overt and covert speech, not decoding which word a person imagined. This paper also does not establish that the cited studies disagree about which regions contribute. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Studies on inner speech have also shown overlapping mechanisms between attempted and inner speech production.

    “Studies on inner speech have also shown overlapping mechanisms between attempted and inner speech production 34,45,49–52.”

    From Inner speech in motor cortex and implications for speech neuroprostheses (2025) · cites this paper as [45]

    The Discussion (§4.4; page unavailable) reports similar superior-temporal-lobe activation during overt and covert word production, supporting some overlap with inner speech. But the study compares spoken words with imagined speaking, not attempted speech production, so it does not establish overlap for the attempted-speech condition named in the claim. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 3

  1. Lancaster J Rainey L Summerlin J Freitas C Fox P Evans A Toga A Mazziotta J Automated labeling of the human brain: a preliminary report on the development and evaluation of a forward-transform method Human Brain Mapping 1997 5 4 238 242 20408222 PMC2860189
  2. Lancaster J Woldorff M Parsons L Liotti M Freitas C Rainey L Kochunov P Nickerson D Mikiten S Fox P Automated Talairach atlas labels for functional brain mapping Human Brain Mapping 2000 10 3 120 131 10912591 PMC6871915
  3. Talairach J Tournoux P Co-Planar Sterotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain 1988 Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc. New York

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Pei, X., Leuthardt, E. C., Gaona, C. M., Brunner, P., Wolpaw, J. R., & Schalk, G.
Affiliations
  • New York State Department of Health (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
Schalk, Gerwin
ORCID
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-02
Volume
54
Issue
4
Pages
2960-2972
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.10.029
PMC
PMC3020260
OpenAlex
W2010495159
Cited by
204
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 18
FWCI
6.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R01EB006356, EB000856, R01EB000856, EB006356)
  • Army Research Office
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
Keywords
high gamma activity, electrocorticography, covert speech, word repetition, language processing, Wernicke's area, Broca's area, supramarginal gyrus, superior temporal lobe, auditory processing, premotor cortex, primary motor cortex, spatiotemporal dynamics
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Electroencephalography, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Verbal Behavior

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