CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,159Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismReading and Literacy DevelopmentLanguage Development and Disorders

A review and synthesis of the first 20years of PET and fMRI studies of heard speech, spoken language and reading

Open access
Price, Cathy J.·2012·NeuroImage
DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.04.062PMC PMC3398395
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The anatomy of language has been investigated with PET or fMRI for more than 20 years. Here I attempt to provide an overview of the brain areas associated with heard speech, speech production and reading. The conclusions of many hundreds of studies were considered, grouped according to the type of processing, and reported in the order that they were published. Many findings have been replicated time and time again leading to some consistent and undisputable conclusions. These are summarised in an anatomical model that indicates the location of the language areas and the most consistent functions that have been assigned to them. The implications for cognitive models of language processing are also considered. In particular, a distinction can be made between processes that are localized to specific structures (e.g. sensory and motor processing) and processes where specialisation arises in the distributed pattern of activation over many different areas that each participate in multiple functions. For example, phonological processing of heard speech is supported by the functional integration of auditory processing and articulation; and orthographic processing is supported by the functional integration of visual processing, articulation and semantics. Future studies will undoubtedly be able to improve the spatial precision with which functional regions can be dissociated but the greatest challenge will be to understand how different brain regions interact with one another in their attempts to comprehend and produce language.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review synthesizes 20 years of PET/fMRI studies of heard speech, spoken language, and reading, concluding that language depends on distributed, interacting brain networks rather than isolated classical language areas. It provides an anatomical-functional model in which specialization emerges from patterns of activation across regions that each participate in multiple language and non-language functions.

Key findings

  • Across many hundreds of studies, findings were highly replicated: language processing relies on concurrent activation in multiple brain areas, and no area was uniquely activated by speech.
  • Phonological processing of heard speech is supported by functional integration of auditory processing and articulation; orthographic processing is supported by integration of visual processing, articulation, and semantics.
  • Consistent regional functions include left posterior superior temporal cortex for sound familiarity, left anterior superior temporal gyrus for acoustic complexity, left inferior frontal/premotor areas for articulatory recoding, and ventral supramarginal gyrus for auditory attention/categorization.
  • Reading dissociates into a lexico-semantic route linking left ventral occipitotemporal cortex with left ventral inferior frontal gyrus, and a non-semantic phonological decoding route linking superior temporal and ventral inferior parietal cortices to dorsal precentral gyrus.

Methods

  • Narrative review of PET/fMRI papers reported between 1992 and 2011 that identified brain areas activated in healthy adults during speech comprehension and production tasks.
  • Papers were selected from PubMed using combinations of language-process terms and imaging or brain-region terms; exclusions included studies inferring language processing from activation, abnormal populations, and activations varying across normal populations.
  • For each paper, conclusions stated in the abstract were extracted, with minimal terminology adjustments; results were organized by auditory speech comprehension, speech production, and reading, and further divided into four publication eras.

Limitations

  • The paper states that exclusions of abnormal populations and normal-population variability were due to time constraints and the overwhelming number of papers (> thousand) needing consideration.
  • The paper states that identified papers were influenced by the author’s personal memories, PubMed availability, search terms, and authors’ keywords.
  • The paper states that conclusions are not based on Talairach or MNI coordinates of peak activations, so they depend on subjective interpretation of authors; it also notes computational coordinate-based meta-analyses have their own subjectivity.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.04.062

Cites

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 317 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingnone given

    More dorsal superior temporal lobe regions (pSTG and TP) are activated when word retrieval from semantics becomes more difficult.

    “with more dorsal superior temporal lobe regions (pSTG and TP in Table 2 and Fig. 3) when retrieval becomes more difficult”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    When articulation and semantics are controlled, word retrieval from semantics most consistently activates the left middle frontal gyrus, Crus 1 of the right lateral posterior cerebellum, and posterior regions in the left middle and inferior temporal cortices.

    “The most consistent activation for word retrieval from semantics when articulation and semantics are controlled were: the left middle frontal gyrus (MFG in Table 2 and Fig. 3), Crux 1 of the right lateral (l) posterior (p) cerebellum (CB) and posterior regions in the left middle and inferior temporal cortices (L.pMTG and LpITG in Table 2 and Fig. 3)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingnone given

    An anterior zone in the anterior cingulate is associated with response suppression during word retrieval from semantics.

    “and an anterior zone in the anterior cingulate (ACC a zone in Table 2 and Fig. 3) associated with response suppression.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingnone given

    The mapping of heard or intended speech to orofacial movements is associated with activation in the ventral pars opercularis and ventral premotor cortex, with subliminal motor activity in lobules IV and V of the bilateral anterior medial cerebellum.

    “The mapping of heard or intended speech to orofacial movements has been associated with activation in the ventral pars opercularis (pOpv in Table 2 and Fig. 3) and the ventral premotor cortex (vPM in Table 2 and Fig. 3) with subliminal motor activity in lobules IV and V of the bilateral anterior medial cerebellum (a CB).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingnone given

    Mapping from orofacial movements to auditory imagery involves the auditory imagery areas PT and vSMG.

    “In contrast, mapping in the reverse direction (from orofacial movements to auditory imagery) involves the auditory imagery areas discussed in Auditory processing that is common to speech and nonspeech sounds section (i.e. PT and vSMG in Table 2 and Fig. 3).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 80
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 39
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Covert articulation is a mix of processing that occurs prior to overt articulation and independently from word retrieval.

    “Covert articulation is a mix of processing that occurs prior to overt articulation and independently from word retrieval.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Producing the sounds of speech involves more than sensorimotor activity in pre- and post-central regions that control orofacial muscles; it also involves activation related to laryngeal activity, phonation, and voluntary control of breathing.

    “Producing the sounds of speech involves more than sensorimotor activity in the pre- and post-central regions (PrC and PoC in Table 2 and Fig. 3) that control the orofacial muscles. It also involves activation related to laryngeal activity, phonation and the voluntary control of breathing.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    A distinction has been made between areas involved in motor execution (e.g. ACC) and the cerebellum and subcortical areas involved in timing and control of motor activity.

    “A distinction has also been made between areas involved in motor execution (e.g. ACC in Table 1) and the cerebellum (CB in Table 2 and Fig. 3) and subcortical areas (PUT in Table 2 and Fig. 3) involved in the timing and control of motor activity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Left lateralized superior temporal activation during auditory processing is related to hemispheric differences in the processing of rapidly changing auditory inputs and/or the influence of left lateralized inferior frontal and temporo-parietal activation involved when auditory inputs need to be segmented in a meaningful way.

    “First, left lateralized superior temporal activation during auditory processing has been observed and related to hemispheric differences in the processing of rapidly changing auditory inputs and/or the influence of left lateralized inferior frontal and temporo-parietal activation (LpOp, PT and TPJ in Table 2 and Fig. 3) that is involved when auditory inputs need to be segmented in a meaningful way”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Spoken and written language relies on concurrent activation in multiple brain areas.

    “This has clearly established that spoken and written language relies on concurrent activation in multiple brain areas.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The conclusions stated in the abstracts of the included papers accurately reflect the findings of those papers.
    • Rests on an assumption: The set of papers selected via PubMed search terms and personal memories is representative of the PET/fMRI language literature from 1992–2011.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Complex language functions are not localized in specific brain regions; they are distributed across networks of regions with each area making a specific contribution to the performance of the task which depends on its connections to other areas in a parallel distributed hierarchy.

    “Petersen and Fiez (1993) also emphasized that complex language functions were not localized in specific brain regions; they were distributed across networks of regions with each area making a specific contribution to the performance of the task which depends on its connections to other areas in a parallel distributed hierarchy.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Petersen and Fiez (1993)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Inferior frontal or premotor activations during auditory speech processing are the consequence of top-down supplementary mechanisms that constrain bottom-up speech processing in temporal regions, particularly when speech is unfamiliar or ambiguous.

    “Altogether, there was a growing perspective that inferior frontal or premotor activations during auditory speech processing were the consequence of top-down supplementary mechanisms that constrain bottom up speech processing in temporal regions (Zekveld et al., 2006), particularly when speech is unfamiliar or ambiguous (Dehaene-Lambertz et al., 2005).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Zekveld et al., 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Dehaene-Lambertz et al., 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Both the left and right planum temporale are involved in early auditory processing, contrary to the classic view that the left planum temporale was specialised for language.

    “This finding suggested that both the left and right planum temporale were involved in early auditory processing, which is contrary to the classic view that the left planum temporale was specialised for language (Geschwind and Levitsky, 1968).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Geschwind and Levitsky, 1968

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Understanding the functional anatomy of language cannot be deduced from a single experiment; rather, it requires the integration of results from multiple experiments using multiple techniques.

    “In this context, understanding the functional anatomy of language cannot be deduced from a single experiment; rather, it requires the integration of results from multiple experiments using multiple techniques.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The observed left lateralization for rapid frequency modulations was proposed to contribute to the lateralization of higher-level language functions.

    “As rapid frequency modulations are a key feature in speech sounds, the observed left lateralization was proposed to contribute to the lateralization of higher-level language functions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    During verbal fluency, activation increases in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex but decreases in superior temporal cortices; during lexical decisions on heard words, activation increases in the superior temporal cortices with no change in prefrontal activation.

    “Frith et al. (1991) who demonstrated that when words were produced without stimuli (i.e. verbal fluency) activation increased in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex but decreased in superior temporal cortices, whereas, during lexical decisions on heard words, activation increased in the superior temporal cortices with no change in prefrontal activation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Frith et al. (1991) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The posterior superior temporal cortex is related to sound familiarity while the anterior superior temporal gyrus is related to the acoustic complexity of speech.

    “Together, these studies are consistent with the previous claims that the posterior superior temporal cortex is related to sound familiarity while the anterior superior temporal gyrus is related to the acoustic complexity of speech.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    The involvement of left inferior frontal and temporo-parietal activation during auditory segmentation tasks might be a consequence of auditory short-term memory, covert articulation or vocalisation mechanisms.

    “Second, the involvement of left inferior frontal and temporo-parietal activation during auditory segmentation tasks might be a consequence of auditory short-term memory, covert articulation or vocalisation mechanisms.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Word representations are distributed in the left superior temporal cortex and word processing in the temporal lobe is modulated by the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.

    “proposing that word representations were distributed in the left superior temporal cortex and word processing in the temporal lobe was modulated by the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Friston et al., 1991 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Right lateralized auditory responses are observed for environmental sounds, non-linguistic vocal sounds like laughter, and the familiarity of vocalisation.

    “Right lateralized auditory responses were observed for environmental sounds (Specht and Reul, 2003; Thierry et al., 2003; Thierry and Price, 2006), non-linguistic vocal sounds like laughter (Belin et al., 2002; Kriegstein and Giraud, 2004; Meyer et al., 2005), and the familiarity of vocalisation (Kriegstein and Giraud, 2004).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Specht and Reul, 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Belin et al., 2002 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Kriegstein and Giraud, 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Within the same temporoparietal region, there may be multiple overlapping functionally distinct cell populations for perception and covert production.

    “A second possibility is that, within the same temporoparietal region, there are multiple overlapping functionally distinct cell populations for perception and covert production (Hickok et al., 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hickok et al., 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Early visual cortices are activated during visual imagery in the absence of visual stimulation, with this early sensory activation sustained by recurrent interactions with higher-level processing areas.

    “Models of visual processing provide a useful analogy here because it has been shown that early visual cortices (e.g. the calcarine cortex and the lateral occipital cortex) are activated during visual imagery in the absence of visual stimulation (Klein et al., 2000; Lambert et al., 2002; Stokes et al., 2009, 2011) with this early sensory activation sustained by recurrent interactions with higher”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Klein et al., 2000 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Lambert et al., 2002 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Stokes et al., 2009, 2011

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The key difference between the memory function in pSTS and the posterior planum temporale is that pSTS is more involved in speech than nonspeech whereas the planum temporale does not distinguish speech and non-speech.

    “The key difference between this memory function in pSTS (which is in the sulcus on the lower surface of the superior temporal gyrus) and the posterior planum temporale (which is on the dorsal surface of the superior temporal gyrus) is that pSTS is more involved in speech than nonspeech whereas the planum temporale does not distinguish speech and non-speech (see Auditory processing that is common”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Common responses to auditory, motor and memory processes in the same anatomical area may reflect a common process, such as demands on auditory imagery.

    “A third explanation of common responses to auditory, motor and memory processes in the same anatomical area is that they reflect a common process. For example, activation during auditory working memory, silent motor tasks and sentence processing can all be explained by the demands on auditory imagery.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    The angular gyri have been associated with the crossmodal integration of semantic features and in predicting the semantic nature of the stimulus, while more medial parietal areas are more involved for narrative than single word comprehension.

    “The angular gyri (ANG in Table 2 and Fig. 3) have been associated with the crossmodal integration of semantic features and in predicting the semantic nature of the stimulus while more medial parietal areas (precuneus and posterior cingulate) are more involved for narrative than single word comprehension.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.
    • Rests on an assumption: Results from the cited PET/fMRI studies are valid and comparable across studies.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Depending on the task, left lateralized activation for speech relative to acoustically matched nonspeech sounds is reported in the ventral supramarginal gyrus, where there is accumulating evidence of involvement in auditory attention and categorization functions that are not specific to speech.

    “(4) the ventral supramarginal gyrus (vSMG in Table 2 and Fig. 3) where there is accumulating evidence of involvement in auditory attention and categorization functions that that are not specific to speech.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.
    • Rests on an assumption: Results from the cited PET/fMRI studies are valid and comparable across studies.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Either the premotor response is not involved in articulation or subarticulatory activation occurs during the perception of non-speech sounds.

    “This implies that either the premotor response was not involved in articulation or that subarticulatory activation occurs during the perception of non-speech sounds.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Depending on the task, left lateralized activation for speech relative to acoustically matched nonspeech sounds is reported in the left posterior superior temporal cortex, where it is consistently related to sound familiarity.

    “Depending on the task, left lateralized activation for speech relative to acoustically matched nonspeech sounds was reported in: (1) the left posterior superior temporal cortex (pSTS in Table 2 and Fig. 3) where it was consistently related to sound familiarity;”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.
    • Rests on an assumption: Results from the cited PET/fMRI studies are valid and comparable across studies.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Depending on the task, left lateralized activation for speech relative to acoustically matched nonspeech sounds is reported in the left anterior superior temporal gyrus, where it is consistently related to the acoustic complexity of speech.

    “(2) the left anterior superior temporal gyrus (aSTS in Table 2 and Fig. 3) where it was consistently related to the acoustic complexity of speech;”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.
    • Rests on an assumption: Results from the cited PET/fMRI studies are valid and comparable across studies.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Both speech production and comprehension involve access to the semantic system.

    “For example, both involve access to the semantic system.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Anterior temporal areas are involved in accessing increasingly specific semantic associations, with activation for sentences and narratives spreading anteriorly into the temporal pole.

    “Anterior temporal areas (aSTS, LaMTG/LaITG in Table 2 and Fig. 3) are involved in accessing increasingly specific semantic associations, with activation for sentences and narratives spreading anteriorly into the temporal pole.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.
    • Rests on an assumption: Results from the cited PET/fMRI studies are valid and comparable across studies.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Depending on the task, left lateralized activation for speech relative to acoustically matched nonspeech sounds is reported in the left inferior frontal and premotor areas, where it is consistently related to articulatory re-coding that places top-down constraints on the disambiguation of speech sounds.

    “(3) the left inferior frontal and premotor areas (LpOp and vPM in Table 2 and Fig. 3) where it was consistently related to articulatory re-coding that places top-down constraints on the disambiguation of speech sounds;”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.
    • Rests on an assumption: Results from the cited PET/fMRI studies are valid and comparable across studies.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Premotor activation is not sensitive to articulatory complexity during speech perception.

    “as premotor activation was not found to be sensitive to articulatory complexity during speech perception, Tremblay and Small (2011a) suggested that motor representations were incompletely activated during perception.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Tremblay and Small, 2011a

      Not checked in the free run.

    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.
    • Rests on an assumption: The tasks used in the cited studies isolate the intended cognitive processes.
    • Rests on an assumption: Results from the cited PET/fMRI studies are valid and comparable across studies.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Left posterior inferior frontal activation is related to articulatory processes because it is positively correlated with the phonotactic frequency of heard sounds.

    “There was continued support for the view that the left posterior inferior frontal activation is related to articulatory processes because it was positively correlated with the phonotactic frequency (the pronounceability of combinations of phonemes) of heard sounds (Vaden et al., 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Vaden et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.
    • Rests on an assumption: The tasks used in the cited studies isolate the intended cognitive processes.
    • Rests on an assumption: Results from the cited PET/fMRI studies are valid and comparable across studies.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A striking double dissociation was observed with greater activation in the left dorsal pars opercularis for syntactic than semantic processing and greater activation for semantics than syntactics in the ventral inferior frontal gyrus or the right inferior frontal lobe.

    “a striking double dissociation was observed with greater activation in the left dorsal pars opercularis for syntactic than semantic processing (Kang et al., 1999; Dapretto and Bookheimer, 1999) and greater activation for semantics than syntactics in the ventral inferior frontal gyrus (BA 47, pars orbitalis; Dapretto and Bookheimer, 1999) or the right inferior frontal lobe (Kang et al., 1999).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Kang et al., 1999 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Dapretto and Bookheimer, 1999 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.
    • Rests on an assumption: The tasks used in the cited studies isolate the intended cognitive processes.
    • Rests on an assumption: Results from the cited PET/fMRI studies are valid and comparable across studies.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    These effects are more likely to reflect amodal semantic processing than access to semantics from speech sounds because they were commonly activated irrespective of whether the stimuli were auditory or visual words.

    “These effects are more likely to reflect amodal semantic processing than access to semantics from speech sounds because they were commonly activated irrespective of whether the stimuli were auditory or visual words (Chee et al., 1999).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chee et al., 1999 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.
    • Rests on an assumption: The tasks used in the cited studies isolate the intended cognitive processes.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Semantic decisions on the meaning of words involve the left middle and inferior temporal and angular gyri, while phonological decisions on the sound content of words involve the supramarginal gyri and the left posterior inferior frontal gyrus.

    “Together these studies suggested that semantic decisions on the meaning of words involve the left middle and inferior temporal and angular gyri while phonological decisions on the sound content of words involve the supramarginal gyri and the left posterior inferior frontal gyrus.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.
    • Rests on an assumption: The tasks used in the cited studies isolate the intended cognitive processes.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Covert articulation tasks can evoke inner speech because auditory images of speech can be heard when preparing to articulate words without auditory stimulation.

    “In addition to motor planning, this level of processing can evoke “inner speech” because the auditory images of speech can be heard in our heads when we prepare to articulate words even though there is no auditory stimulation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The left posterior inferior frontal gyrus is involved in auditory-articulatory mapping, resulting in subvocal articulation during perception and auditory imagery of speech during articulation.

    “This was consistent with the view that the left posterior inferior frontal gyrus was involved in auditory-articulatory mapping which resulted in subvocal articulation during perception and auditory imagery of speech during articulation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Premisecitation

    When word retrieval becomes more semantically demanding, activation is also reported in the medial superior frontal cortex, left pars orbitalis, left angular gyrus/inferior parietal cortex, left ventrolateral temporal cortex and left hippocampus.

    “When word retrieval became more semantically demanding, for example when subjects were instructed to retrieve narratives or when distracting semantic information was added, activation for word retrieval was also reported in the medial superior frontal cortex (Birn et al., 2010), the left pars orbitalis in the ventral inferior frontal cortex (de Zubicaray and McMahon, 2009; Saur et al., 2008), the”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Birn et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites de Zubicaray and McMahon, 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

    • Rests on an assumption: Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.
    • Rests on an assumption: The tasks used in the cited studies isolate the intended cognitive processes.
    • Rests on an assumption: Results from the cited PET/fMRI studies are valid and comparable across studies.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Left posterior inferior frontal activation is less in the context of phonological cues and more when articulatory associations of a word are unknown or need to be held in short-term memory.

    “This suggests that left posterior inferior frontal activation was less in the context of phonological cues and more when the articulatory associations of the word were unknown or needed to be held in short term memory.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The left ventral premotor cortex is associated with generating the motor acts related to speech sounds, nonspeech sounds, and orofacial movements not associated with sound production.

    “while the left ventral premotor cortex was associated with generating the motor acts related to speech sounds (Ghosh et al., 2008; Peeva et al., 2010), nonspeech sounds (Chang et al., 2009) and orofacial movements such as tongue protrusion and lip pursing that are not associated with sound production (Price et al., 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Ghosh et al., 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Peeva et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Chang et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    During silent articulation, the pre-SMA is associated with sequencing abstract motor plans while the SMA-proper is associated with the control of motor output.

    “A rostrocaudal gradient distinction was made between the pre-SMA and the more posterior SMA-proper: During silent articulation, the pre-SMA was associated with sequencing abstract motor plans while the SMA-proper was associated with the control of motor output (Alario et al., 2006).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Alario et al., 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The left premotor cortex (BA 6) is associated with compiling motor codes for syllables and with a speech sound map that links phonemes or frequent syllables to their associated motor programs.

    “More posteriorly, in the left premotor cortex (BA 6), activation was associated with compiling motor codes for syllables (Indefrey and Levelt, 2004) and a “speech sound map” that linked phonemes or frequent syllables to their associated motor programs (Guenther et al., 2006).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Indefrey and Levelt, 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Guenther et al., 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Within the pars opercularis, the dorsal part is activated by action observation as well as imitation, while the ventral part is activated by imitation more than observation.

    “Within the pars opercularis, a distinction was made between dorsal and ventral parts with the dorsal part activated by action observation as well as imitation but the ventral part activated by imitation more than observation (Molnar-Szakacs et al., 2005).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Molnar-Szakacs et al., 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Controlled breathing activates dorsal primary motor cortices bilaterally, the lateral pre-motor cortex in the right hemisphere, the SMA, and left ventrolateral thalamus, with additional activation for expiration in more bilateral ventrolateral primary motor areas.

    “For example, controlled breathing activated dorsal primary motor cortices bilaterally, the lateral pre-motor cortex in the right hemisphere, the SMA and left ventrolateral thalamus, with additional activation for expiration in more bilateral ventrolateral primary motor areas.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Tongue movements produce symmetrical activation at the lower primary motor cortex, with left lateralization in the same region during automatic speech and right-sided activation during singing.

    “Tongue movements were found to produce symmetrical activation at the lower primary motor cortex, with left lateralization in the same region during automatic speech and right-sided activation during singing (Wildgruber et al., 1996).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wildgruber et al., 1996 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Speech activates the intermediate dorsal and rostral ACC, which is distinct from more anterior regions involved in control of manual tasks.

    “Investigation of the role of the anterior cingulate cortex in higher-order motor control showed that speech activated the intermediate dorsal and the rostral ACC which is distinct from more anterior regions involved in the control of manual tasks (Paus et al., 1993).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Paus et al., 1993 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The inhibitory role of the pre-SMA may explain greater pre-SMA activation for volitional relative to stimulus-driven mouth movements and for production of unfamiliar speech sounds.

    “The inhibitory role for the pre-SMA may explain why activation was found to be greater for volitional relative to stimulus driven mouth movements (Tremblay and Gracco, 2010) because selecting the correct response (in volitional mouth movements) requires competing responses to be inhibited. It may also explain the numerous reports that pre-SMA activation is greater for the production of unfamiliar”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Tremblay and Gracco, 2010

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Ghosh et al., 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Peeva et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Left putamen activation is higher for auditory repetition of words in a non-native language than the native language.

    “The role of the left putamen in speech production was also discussed in a paper by Klein et al. (1994) who observed that left putamen activation was higher for auditory repetition of words in a non-native language than the native language which can be explained in terms of increased demands on the articulatory system.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Klein et al. (1994) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Activation in motor cortex and left thalamus increases with rate of speech production, while activation in left putamen is higher for slower production rates.

    “However, while activation in the motor cortex and left thalamus increased with the rate of speech production, activation in the left putamen was higher for slower production rates (Wildgruber et al., 2001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wildgruber et al., 2001 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Left putamen activation is associated with counting and reading written syllables, consistent with the putamen being involved in timing of speech production.

    “This might explain why left putamen activation was associated with counting (Hinton et al., 2004) and reading written syllables (Bohland and Guenther, 2006) and is consistent with prior claims that the putamen is involved in the timing of speech production.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Hinton et al., 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Bohland and Guenther, 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Left anterior insula activation is higher for overt than covert speech and unaffected by demands on motor planning.

    “The association of the left insula with motor processing rather than articulatory planning was emphasized again following observations that left anterior insula activation was higher for overt than covert speech (Ackermann and Riecker, 2004; Shuster and Lemieux, 2005) and unaffected by the demands on motor planning (Shuster and Lemieux, 2005; Blank et al., 2002).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Ackermann and Riecker, 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Shuster and Lemieux, 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Blank et al., 2002 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Left lateralized activation during overt articulation is observed in the insula and dorsolateral premotor cortex, contrasted with bilateral activation in sensorimotor cortex.

    “Left lateralized activation during overt articulation was observed in the insula and the dorsolateral premotor cortex and this was contrasted to the bilateral activation in sensorimotor cortex (Riecker et al., 2005).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Riecker et al., 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Left lateralized activation in primary motor cortex for phonation is contrasted with bilateral activation for tongue movements.

    “Similarly, left lateralized activation in the primary motor cortex for phonation was contrasted to bilateral activation for tongue movements (Terumitsu et al., 2006).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Terumitsu et al., 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Left anterior insula, bilateral premotor and sensorimotor cortices, posterior cerebellum, SMA, thalamus, and striatum are activated for producing melodies and whistling as well as speech.

    “All the above areas (left anterior insula, bilateral premotor and sensorimotor cortices, posterior cerebellum, SMA, thalamus and striatum) were activated for producing melodies (Brown et al., 2006) and whistling (Dresel et al., 2005) as well as speech.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Brown et al., 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Dresel et al., 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Right inferior posterior cerebellum (HVIIIA) is activated by vocalisation and breathing during articulation and during passive listening to auditory clicks that vary in frequency.

    “and the right inferior posterior cerebellum (HVIIIA) that was activated by vocalisation and breathing during articulation (Nota and Honda, 2004) and during passive listening to auditory clicks that varied in frequency (Ackermann et al., 2001).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Nota and Honda, 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Ackermann et al., 2001 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Areas activated by speech are also activated by nonspeech orofacial movements and vocal tract gestures, sniffing, singing, volitional exhalation, and phonation.

    “As shown previously, the areas that are activated by speech were also activated by nonspeech orofacial movements and vocal tract gestures (Chang et al., 2009), sniffing (Koritnik et al., 2009), singing (Zarate et al., 2010), volitional exhalation and phonation (Loucks et al., 2007).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Chang et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Koritnik et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Zarate et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Increased rate of articulation has a positive influence on activation in cerebellar regions and thalamus but a negative influence on activation in the striatum.

    “A distinction was also made between activation for articulation in the left and right medial posterior cerebellum and the striatum (caudate and putamen) because increased rate of articulation had a positive influence on activation in the cerebellar regions and thalamus but a negative influence on activation in the striatum (Riecker et al., 2005, 2006).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Riecker et al., 2005, 2006

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Left lateralized subcortical responses are important during speech production; left thalamus is associated with breathing and basal ganglia with timing of production.

    “These findings emphasized the importance of left lateralized subcortical responses during speech production and dissociated the function of the left thalamus (associated with breathing) from that in the basal ganglia (associated with the timing of production).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The thalamus is activated during the control of breathing as well as articulation.

    “The same study showed that the thalamus was activated during the control of breathing as well as articulation (Murphy et al., 1997) and this may explain some of the left lateralized thalamic activation observed during verbal fluency (Paulesu et al., 1997), naming objects, naming letters, naming colours and reading (Price and Friston, 1997) especially when the rate of speech production increased (”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Murphy et al., 1997 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Activation is left lateralized in the putamen during an overt versus silent stem completion task and in the posterior pallidum during auditory repetition.

    “Activation was also left lateralized in the putamen during an overt versus silent stem completion task (Rosen et al., 2000) and in the posterior pallidum during auditory repetition (Wise et al., 1999).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Rosen et al., 2000 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Wise et al., 1999 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Left lateralized thalamic activation is observed during verbal fluency, naming objects, naming letters, naming colours, and reading, especially when rate of speech production increases.

    “and this may explain some of the left lateralized thalamic activation observed during verbal fluency (Paulesu et al., 1997), naming objects, naming letters, naming colours and reading (Price and Friston, 1997) especially when the rate of speech production increased (Palmer et al., 2001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Paulesu et al., 1997 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Price and Friston, 1997

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Palmer et al., 2001 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    Articulation of speech produces sound for the listener that will also be heard by the speaker.

    “Articulation of speech produces sound for the listener that will also be heard by the speaker.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    During language acquisition, auditory processing of self-produced speech is used to tune motor production so that produced auditory output matches intended auditory output.

    “During language acquisition, auditory processing of self-produced speech is used to tune motor production so that the produced auditory output matches the intended auditory output.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisereasoning

    Bilateral insula activation increases during overt picture naming when phonological/articulatory interference increases.

    “A similar explanation may account for why bilateral insula activation increases during overt picture naming when phonological/articulatory interference increases (Mechelli et al., 2007).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Mechelli et al., 2007 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In anterior cingulate, the most posterior zone is associated with motor execution rather than conflict monitoring or response selection, while the anterior zone associated with conflict monitoring is more activated by speech than nonspeech.

    “In the anterior cingulate, the most posterior zone was associated with motor execution, rather than conflict monitoring or response selection (Schulze et al., 2011) but the anterior zone associated with conflict monitoring (Schulze et al., 2011) was found to be more activated by speech than nonspeech (Chang et al., 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Schulze et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Chang et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    When we engage in motor activity, a discharge corollary to the motor command is sent from motor to sensory structures.

    “To explain the activation in auditory processing areas during silent speech production, Paus et al. (1996b) emphasized that when we engage in motor activity, a discharge corollary to the motor command is sent from motor to sensory structures.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Paus et al., 1996b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The cerebellum has a modulatory role in motor functions; during articulation, activity in bilateral superior cerebellar regions may contribute to timing of consonant-vowel syllable production and online sequencing of syllables into larger utterances.

    “The cerebellum is thought to have a modulatory role in motor functions (Murdoch et al., 2010) and, during articulation, activity in bilateral superior cerebellar regions may contribute to the timing of consonant–vowel syllable production (Ghosh et al., 2008) and the online sequencing of syllables into fast, smooth and rhythmically organized larger utterances (Ackermann, 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Murdoch et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Ghosh et al., 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Ackermann, 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Suppression may be less involved in producing nonspeech sounds because selection and production of nonspeech may be slower with less competition from highly similar motor programs.

    “Such suppression may be less involved in producing nonspeech sounds because selection and production of nonspeech may be slower with less competition from highly similar motor programs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In SMA-proper, activation is greater for complex articulation than prolonged vowel production or exhalation and is maintained during production, consistent with a role in execution as well as initiation.

    “In the SMA-proper, activation was greater for complex articulation than prolonged vowel production or exhalation (Loucks et al., 2007) and maintained during production consistent with a role in execution as well as initiation (Brendel et al., 2010).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Loucks et al., 2007 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Brendel et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Right posterior lateral inferior cerebellum (Lobule VII) is associated with word retrieval; very ventral and medial parts of lobule VIIIA are activated when sensorimotor feedback is disrupted.

    “This contrasts to the function of the right posterior lateral inferior cerebellum (Lobule VII) that was associated with word retrieval (Word retrieval from semantics. Time era 2002‐2006 and Word retrieval from semantics. Time era: 2007‐2011 sections above); and the very ventral and medial parts of lobule VIIIA that are activated when sensorimotor feedback is disrupted (see Auditory‐motor feedback”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Once speech is mastered, auditory feedback is less useful and we do not actively attend to the sound of our own voice; we may even inhibit auditory processing of the spoken response.

    “Once speech is mastered, auditory feedback is less useful and we do not actively attend to the sound of our own voice. We may even inhibit auditory processing of the spoken response.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Bilateral insula regions are involved in phonation for speech, volitional exhalation, and syllable singing.

    “This is consistent with observations that bilateral insula regions are involved in phonation for speech, volitional exhalation (Loucks et al., 2007) and syllable singing (Brown et al., 2009; Zarate et al., 2010).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Loucks et al., 2007 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Brown et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Zarate et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Lobule VI is associated with lip and tongue movements and is proposed to be involved in instantiating internal models of vocal tract articulation during both speech and singing.

    “Lobule VI is associated with lip and tongue movements, therefore Callan et al. (2007) have proposed that it is involved in instantiating internal models of vocal tract articulation during both speech and singing.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Callan et al. (2007)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisereasoning

    Auditory feedback during speech production is not completely inhibited.

    “Nevertheless, to anyone who has struggled to speak normally on a telephone line that delays the auditory feedback, it is clear that auditory feedback during speech production is not completely inhibited.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    Words written in alphabetic script are composed of a limited number of visual features (letters) that provide clues to pronunciation of the whole word.

    “For example, words written in alphabetic script are composed of a limited number of visual features (letters) that provide clues to the pronunciation of the whole word.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Left planum temporale response is consistent with auditory imagery because it is observed when silently imagining speech or recalling auditory relative to visual associations of a picture.

    “The response in the left planum temporale was again consistent with auditory imagery because it was observed when silently imagining speech (Shergill et al., 2001) or for recalling (imagining) the auditory relative to visual associations of a picture of a scene (Wheeler et al., 2000).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Shergill et al., 2001 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Wheeler et al., 2000 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Activation in left planum temporale increases with rate of covert (silent) speech production.

    “would explain why activation in the left planum temporale increased with the rate of covert (silent) speech production (Shergill et al., 2002)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Shergill et al., 2002 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    There are error cells in posterior superior temporal gyrus and planum temporale that respond when there is a mismatch between intended/expected speech and the sound of the speech.

    “This was addressed by Guenther et al. (2006) who proposed that there were “error cells” in the posterior superior temporal gyrus and planum temporale that respond when there is a mismatch between the intended/expected speech and the sound of the speech.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Guenther et al. (2006) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    There needs to be a process by which the anticipated auditory response is integrated with the actual auditory response.

    “There then needs to be a process by which the anticipated auditory response is integrated with the actual auditory response.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Left planum temporale activation is observed during subvocal articulation or presentation of visual stimuli previously experienced with auditory activity.

    “In the left planum temporale (previously associated with auditory imagery), activation was observed during subvocal articulation or the presentation of visual stimuli that had previously been experienced with auditory activity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Auditory imagery during speech production might play an essential role in predicting intended speech production or providing an internal model to which auditory feedback should be matched.

    “Auditory imagery during speech production might play an essential role in predicting the intended speech production, or even providing an internal model to which the auditory feedback should be matched (Heinks-Maldonado et al., 2005).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Heinks-Maldonado et al., 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Although auditory processing is normally less during articulation, it increases when heard sounds are not expected.

    “This suggests that, although auditory processing is normally less during articulation, it increases when the heard sounds are not expected.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Suppression of auditory processing is proportional to quality of feedback; superior temporal activation increases when speech is distorted or auditory feedback is delayed.

    “This suppression of auditory processing was proportional to the quality of the feedback; consequently, superior temporal activation increased when speech was distorted (Christoffels et al., 2007; Tourville et al., 2008; Christofells et al., 2011; Zheng et al., 2010) or when auditory feedback was delayed (Takaso et al., 2010).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Christoffels et al., 2007 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Tourville et al., 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Takaso et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Left pars opercularis and left posterior superior temporal sulcus are more activated for making silent articulatory speech movements relative to silent nonverbal mouth movements, but left posterior planum temporale is equally activated by verbal and nonverbal mouth movements.

    “Second, the left pars opercularis and left posterior superior temporal sulcus were reported to be more activated for making silent articulatory speech movements relative to silent nonverbal mouth movements, but the left posterior planum temporale was equally activated by verbal and nonverbal mouth movements (Price et al., 2011).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Price et al., 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    There are error cells in parietal (somatosensory) cortex that monitor tactile and proprioceptive sensations.

    “Likewise, Guenther et al. (2006) proposed that there were “error cells” in the parietal (somatosensory) cortex that monitor the tactile and proprioceptive sensations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Guenther et al. (2006) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Left posterior temporal activation occurs prior to bilateral superior temporal activation.

    “This implies that left posterior temporal activation occurs prior to bilateral superior temporal activation but, to my knowledge, the differential timing of these responses has still not been tested.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    Written words access the language system via the visual system.

    “Written words access the language system via the visual system.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The error signal is fed back to primary motor cortex to adjust speech output closer to that intended.

    “The error signal is then fed back to the primary motor cortex to adjust the speech output so that it can be closer to that which was intended.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Guenther et al. (2006) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Auditory imagery during articulation results in left lateralized posterior temporal activation, whereas auditory processing of the heard response after articulation results in bilateral superior temporal activation.

    “Together these results suggested that auditory imagery during articulation resulted in left lateralized posterior temporal activation whereas auditory processing of the heard response after articulation resulted in bilateral superior temporal activation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The left occipitotemporal cortex is specialised for extracting and storing abstract whole word patterns.

    “To explain these “lexical familiarity effects”, Kronbichler et al. (2004) proposed that the left occipitotemporal cortex was specialised for extracting and storing abstract whole word patterns.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kronbichler et al., 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Within the ventral occipitotemporal cortex, posterior areas are involved in visual feature extraction and more anterior areas are involved in lexico-semantic processing of the whole word.

    “Within this region, posterior areas are involved in visual feature extraction and more anterior areas are involved in lexico-semantic processing of the whole word.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The left occipitotemporal cortex houses abstract representations of visual words.

    “The strongest and most influential claim was that the left occipitotemporal cortex housed abstract representations of visual words (Cohen et al., 2000; Dehaene et al., 2001).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Cohen et al., 2000 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Dehaene et al., 2001 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The left occipitotemporal cortex is involved in the perceptual processing of generic visual features present in all visual stimuli including words, objects, letters and faces.

    “A second perspective is that the left occipitotemporal cortex is involved in the perceptual processing of generic visual features that are present to varying degrees in all visual stimuli including words, objects, letters and faces (Barton et al., 2010; Mei et al., 2010; Braet et al., 2011; Reinke et al., 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Barton et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Mei et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Braet et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A common neural network was activated by words and pseudowords with the most consistent difference being greater activation for pseudowords, particularly in the left posterior inferior frontal cortex.

    “Overall, there was a general agreement that a common neural network was activated by words and pseudowords with the most consistent difference between word types being greater activation for pseudowords, particularly in the left posterior inferior frontal cortex (Herbster et al., 1997; Hagoort et al., 1999; Fiez and Petersen, 1998; Haist et al., 2001; Xu et al., 2001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Herbster et al., 1997 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Hagoort et al., 1999 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Fiez and Petersen, 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In skilled readers, activation in the left ventral occipitotemporal cortex decreased with experience/exposure to the same stimuli and for stimuli with high relative to low orthographic familiarity and lexical frequency.

    “However, in skilled readers, activation decreased with experience/exposure to the same stimuli (Wong et al., 2009; Xue et al., 2010; Song et al., 2010a, 2010b; Xue and Poldrack, 2007) and for stimuli with high relative to low orthographic familiarity (Kronbichler et al., 2007; Bruno et al., 2008) and lexical frequency (Kronbichler et al., 2007).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Wong et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Xue et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Song et al., 2010a, 2010b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Learning to read tunes the receptive properties of underlying neurons to combinations of letters found within familiar words.

    “led to suggestions that learning to read tuned the receptive properties of the underlying neurons to combinations of letters (such as bigrams and trigrams) that are found within familiar words (Cohen and Dehaene, 2004; Binder et al., 2006).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Cohen and Dehaene, 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Binder et al., 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A comparison of activation for reading the Japanese scripts Kanji and Kana found greater activation for Kanji in the posterior part of the primary visual cortex but did not find any areas significantly more activated for Kana.

    “A comparison of activation for reading the Japanese scripts Kanji and Kana found greater activation for Kanji in the posterior part of the primary visual cortex but did not find any areas that were significantly more activated for Kana (Kiyosawa et al., 1995).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kiyosawa et al., 1995

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Within the common set of areas activated for Kanji and Kana, functional connectivity was stronger in ventral reading areas for Kanji reading and in dorsal reading areas for Kana reading.

    “A dissociation between the scripts was, nevertheless, observed at the level of functional connectivity because, within the common set of areas that were activated for Kanji and Kana, functional connectivity was stronger in ventral reading areas for Kanji reading, and in dorsal reading areas for Kana reading (Kiyosawa et al., 1995).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kiyosawa et al., 1995

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In the early stages of children or adults learning to read, left ventral occipitotemporal activation increased with learning and correlated with the rate of improvement in word recognition.

    “In the early stages of children or adults learning to read, left ventral occipitotemporal activation increased with learning (Brem et al., 2010; Dehaene et al., 2010b) and this correlated with the rate of improvement in word recognition (Ben-Shachar et al., 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Brem et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Dehaene et al., 2010b

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Ben-Shachar et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Left lateralized activation in the ventral occipitotemporal cortex depends on the subregion tested and does not necessarily indicate a specialisation for orthography.

    “Therefore, left lateralized activation in the ventral occipitotemporal cortex depends on the subregion tested and does not necessarily indicate a specialisation for orthography in left ventral occipitotemporal cortex.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Left occipitotemporal activation was less for words with high relative to low lexical frequency.

    “However, this perspective did not explain why left occipitotemporal activation was less for (a) words with high relative to low lexical frequency (Kuo et al., 2003; Kronbichler et al., 2004)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Kuo et al., 2003 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Kronbichler et al., 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Left posterior inferior frontal activation was higher for reading words with irregular spellings than regular spellings and was proportional to response times.

    “Fiez and Petersen (1998) and Fiez et al. (1999) demonstrated this by showing that left posterior inferior frontal activation was also higher for reading words with irregular spellings (e.g. KNIFE) than regular spellings (e.g. BROOM) and was proportional to response times.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Fiez and Petersen, 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Fiez et al., 1999 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Words increased functional coupling between left occipitotemporal cortex and left ventral inferior frontal areas associated with semantic processing while decreasing coupling between left occipitotemporal cortex and inferior frontal regions associated with phonological processing, relative to pseudowords.

    “Specifically, Bokde et al. (2001) demonstrated that, relative to pseudowords, words increased the functional coupling between left occipitotemporal cortex and the left ventral inferior frontal areas associated with semantic processing while decreasing the coupling between the left occipitotemporal cortex and inferior frontal regions associated with phonological processing.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Bokde et al., 2001 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The clearest dissociation so far is between a lexico-semantic reading route that integrates the left ventral occipitotemporal cortex with the left ventral inferior frontal gyrus, and a non-semantic phonological decoding route that links the superior temporal and ventral inferior parietal cortices to the dorsal precentral gyrus.

    “The clearest dissociation so far is between a lexico-semantic reading route that integrates the left ventral occipitotemporal cortex (LvOT in Table 2 and Fig. 3) with the left ventral inferior frontal gyrus, and a non-semantic phonological decoding route that links the superior temporal and ventral inferior parietal cortices to the dorsal precentral gyrus.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A ventral pathway from occipitotemporal cortex sustains fast, fluent word recognition, and a dorsal pathway via temporoparietal cortex supports analytic processing required for learning to integrate orthographic with phonological and semantic features of printed words.

    “Pugh et al. (2000, 2001) also distinguished different reading pathways from the occipitotemporal cortex with: a ventral pathway sustaining fast, fluent word recognition, and a dorsal pathway via the temporoparietal cortex supporting the analytic processing required for learning to integrate orthographic with phonological and semantic features of printed words.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Pugh et al., 2000, 2001

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Definitive interpretations of word and pseudoword activation differences were difficult because words and pseudowords differ in more than one way and because differences in activation are only relative within areas commonly activated by a range of stimuli and tasks.

    “Overall, definitive interpretations of word and pseudoword activation differences were difficult because words and pseudowords differ in more than one way (e.g. visual familiarity, access to semantics and phonological decoding) and because differences in activation are only relative (rather than absolute) within areas that are commonly activated by a range of stimuli and tasks (Jobard et al., 2003”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Jobard et al., 2003 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Mechelli et al., 2003 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Activation in left posterior temporal and parietal cortices was higher for familiar words than pseudowords and for words with irregular compared to regular spellings.

    “Other regions associated with the semantic reading route were the left posterior temporal and parietal cortices, where activation was higher for familiar words than pseudowords (Fiebach et al., 2002; Binder et al., 2003, 2005; Jobard et al., 2003; Ischebeck et al., 2004; Vigneau et al., 2005; Borowsky et al., 2006) and for words with irregular compared to regular spellings (Senaha et al., 2005;”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Fiebach et al., 2002 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Binder et al., 2003, 2005

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Jobard et al., 2003 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The same conclusions have been produced over and over again, demonstrating remarkable consistency of the functional anatomy across individuals and studies.

    “A striking feature is that the same conclusions have been produced over and over again. Although this results in repetitive reading, it is important for validating the findings and demonstrating the remarkable consistency of the functional anatomy across individuals and studies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A dual route neural model of reading proposed that the left posterior occipitotemporal cortex is involved in sublexical processing and is only necessary for pseudoword reading, while familiar words can be read without left occipitotemporal activation via direct connectivity between occipital and parietal regions.

    “A rather different dual route neural model of reading was proposed by Levy et al. (2009) who suggested that the left posterior occipitotemporal cortex was involved in sublexical processing and was only necessary for pseudoword reading. In contrast, familiar words could be read without left occipitotemporal activation by virtue of direct connectivity between occipital and parietal regions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Levy et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A meta-analysis of 35 previous neuroimaging studies of reading dissociated two routes: a lexicosemantic route involving left anterior ventral occipitotemporal cortex, posterior middle temporal gyrus, and triangular inferior frontal gyrus; and direct orthography-to-phonology links involving left superior temporal areas, supramarginal gyrus, and opercular inferior frontal gyrus.

    “In a meta-analysis of 35 previous neuroimaging studies of reading, Jobard et al. (2003) dissociated two routes for reading: (a) a lexicosemantic route involving the left anterior ventral occipitotemporal cortex (basal temporal language area), the posterior part of the middle temporal gyrus, and the triangular part of inferior frontal gyrus; and (b) direct links between orthography and phonology”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Jobard et al., 2003 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The left occipitotemporal cortex is not essential for accessing phonology from orthography.

    “These studies therefore raise the interesting possibility that the left occipitotemporal cortex is not essential for accessing phonology from orthography.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Increased phonological activation for pseudowords compared to words reflects the demands on accessing phonology from sublexical orthographic codes.

    “An appealing interpretation of increased phonological activation for pseudowords compared to words was that it reflected the demands on accessing phonology from sublexical orthographic codes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
109 of 109

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The conclusions stated in the abstracts of the included papers accurately reflect the findings of those papers.

    “For each paper, I extracted the conclusions stated in the abstract; and made minimal adjustments to the functional and anatomical terms.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The terminology adjustments made by the author do not change the meaning of the original conclusions.

    “I only changed terminology that was inconsistent with that used in other studies.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The set of papers selected via PubMed search terms and personal memories is representative of the PET/fMRI language literature from 1992–2011.

    “The papers identified are also influenced by my personal memories of how our knowledge unfolded over the past 20 years, the availability of papers on PubMed, the choice of search terms used by me and the key words used by the authors.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Activation in a brain region during a task indicates that the region is involved in the cognitive process engaged by the task.

    “Overall, the results suggest that phonological processing of speech sounds arises from the functional integration of acoustic processing (in temporal lobe regions) and articulatory processing (in premotor and frontoparietal regions).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The tasks used in the cited studies isolate the intended cognitive processes.

    “A direct comparison of semantic decisions on auditory words to phonological decisions on nonwords demonstrated widely distributed activation in the left middle and inferior temporal gyri, left superior frontal cortex and bilateral angular gyri (Demonet et al., 1992, 1994a).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Results from the cited PET/fMRI studies are valid and comparable across studies.

    “The involvement of widely distributed temporal, parietal and frontal brain areas in speech comprehension continued to be reported (Chee et al., 1999; Hashimoto et al., 2000; Benson et al., 2001; Newman and Twieg, 2001; Vouloumanos et al., 2001; Binder et al., 1997; Nakai et al., 1999; Newman et al., 2001).”
6 of 6

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?

  • Activation of Broca's area or left inferior frontal gyrus has been observed during both overt and silent articulation of words, specifically in the ventral portion of the pars opercularis.

    “In support of this, activation of Broca’s area or left inferior frontal gyrus has been observed during both overt and silent articulation of words, specifically in the ventral portion of the pars opercularis (Price, 2012).”

    From Inner Speech: Development, Cognitive Functions, Phenomenology, and Neurobiology (2015) · cites this paper as Price, 2012

    The Discussion’s “Covert articulatory planning” section associates the pars opercularis with both silent and overt word production and specifically reports ventral left pars opercularis activation during covert articulation. It does not establish that the ventral portion was activated during overt articulation; that part of the claim is more specific than the evidence provided. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Both inner speech and auditory imagery are associated with activation in a set of common regions, including inferior frontal gyrus, insula, SMA, and posterior superior temporal gyri.

    “Both are also associated with activation in a set of common regions, including inferior frontal gyrus, insula, SMA, and posterior superior temporal gyri (among other regions) in neuroimaging studies (Hubbard, 2010; Price, 2012).”

    From Inner Speech: Development, Cognitive Functions, Phenomenology, and Neurobiology (2015) · cites this paper as Price, 2012

    The Discussion sections on auditory–motor feedback and covert articulatory planning report posterior temporal activation during imagined hearing and inferior frontal and SMA activation during silent articulation. The section on overt articulation also reports insula activation during silent rehearsal of tones and verbal information. These findings overlap with parts of the claim, but the review does not establish that both inner speech and auditory imagery activate all four regions as a common set; it describes posterior inferior frontal cortex as more involved in motor planning than in either imagery or inner speech. Page numbers were unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The frontal region associated with speech articulation in functional imaging studies of the neurologically-intact brain is the more posterior precentral cortex.

    “The frontal region associated with speech articulation in functional imaging studies of the neurologically-intact brain is, by contrast, the more posterior precentral cortex (Wise et al., 1999; Price, 2012).”

    From Damage to Broca’s area does not contribute to long-term speech production outcome after stroke (2021) · cites this paper as Price, 2012

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Age-dependent activation is discussed despite an exclusion criterion

    Minor

    The methods say papers reporting activation differences due to age were excluded, but the review reports an age-related reading activation difference as a finding.

1 of 1

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 593 · Cited by 2,159

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Raichle, 1996, What words are telling us about the brain, Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol., 61, 9, 10.1101/SQB.1996.061.01.004 · DOI

Authors
Price, C. J.
Affiliations
Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
Corresponding author
Price, Cathy J.
ORCID
Price, Cathy J.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-08
Volume
62
Issue
2
Pages
816-847
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.04.062
PMC
PMC3398395
OpenAlex
W1982352919
Semantic Scholar
87a309341d6e92d0ae21b77d68dd60f0730dc565
Cited by
2,159
References
593
Citations by year
2026: 130 · 2025: 160 · 2024: 151 · 2023: 139 · 2022: 134 · 2021: 188 · 2020: 183 · 2019: 179 · 2018: 142 · 2017: 159 · 2016: 158 · 2015: 178 · 2014: 138 · 2013: 88 · 2012: 15
FWCI
10.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
Keywords
language localization, spoken language, reading, speech production, phonological processing, orthographic processing, auditory processing, articulation, semantic processing, functional integration
MeSH terms
Brain, Brain Mapping, Humans, Language, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Reading, Speech, Speech Perception, Visual Perception, Positron-Emission Tomography, History, 20th Century, History, 21st Century

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-08.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-08.

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