The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Sex differences in neural processing of language among children
Open accessAbstract
Why females generally perform better on language tasks than males is unknown. Sex differences were here identified in children (ages 9-15) across two linguistic tasks for words presented in two modalities. Bilateral activation in the inferior frontal and superior temporal gyri and activation in the left fusiform gyrus of girls was greater than in boys. Activation in the left inferior frontal and fusiform regions of girls was also correlated with linguistic accuracy irregardless of stimulus modality, whereas correlation with performance accuracy in boys depended on the modality of word presentation (either in visual or auditory association cortex). This pattern suggests that girls rely on a supramodal language network, whereas boys process visual and auditory words differently. Activation in the left fusiform region was additionally correlated with performance on standardized language tests in which girls performed better, additional evidence of its role in early sex differences for language.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Major differences between men and women are observed in dialogue structure, word reading, and children's linguistic tasks.
“major differences are observed in dialogue structure75, word reading76, and even in children’s linguistic tasks77.”
From Sex and gender differences and biases in artificial intelligence for biomedicine and healthcare (2020) · cites this paper as [77]
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 83 · Cited by 254
Metadata
- Authors
- Burman, D. D., Bitan, T., & Booth, J. R.
- Affiliations
- Northwestern University (US)
- University of Haifa (IL)
- Corresponding author
- Burman, Douglas D.
- Venue
- Neuropsychologia
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1349-1362
- ISSN
- 0028-3932 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2478638
- OpenAlex
- W2165111926
- Cited by
- 254
- References
- 83
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 7.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Neuropsychologia (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Northwestern University
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (DC006149, R21DC006149)
- National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD042049, R56HD042049, HD042049)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Keywords
- sex differences, language processing, children, brain activation, fusiform gyrus, inferior frontal gyrus, superior temporal gyrus, visual word processing, auditory word processing, language performance, standardized language tests
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Auditory Perception, Brain, Child, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Female, Fixation, Ocular, Humans, Language Development, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychomotor Performance, Reading, Sex Characteristics, Software, Visual Perception
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
