Cited by 615Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesReading and Literacy Development

Reworking the language network

Open access
Fedorenko, Evelina, Thompson-Schill, Sharon L.·2014·Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Abstract

Prior investigations of functional specialization have focused on the response profiles of particular brain regions. Given the growing emphasis on regional covariation, we propose to reframe these questions in terms of brain 'networks' (collections of regions jointly engaged by some mental process). Despite the challenges that investigations of the language network face, a network approach may prove useful in understanding the cognitive architecture of language. We propose that a language network plausibly includes a functionally specialized 'core' (brain regions that coactivate with each other during language processing) and a domain-general 'periphery' (a set of brain regions that may coactivate with the language core regions at some times but with other specialized systems at other times, depending on task demands). Framing the debate around network properties such as this may prove to be a more fruitful way to advance our understanding of the neurobiology of language.

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

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

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tics.2013.12.006

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

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

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

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Brain areas and associated circuits or networks may be engaged in tasks differently over time: some transiently and some consistently.

    “Brain areas and associated circuits or networks may be engaged in tasks differently over time: some transiently and some consistently (2, 3).”
  • Many so-called domain-general areas engage in multiple functions, differing from domain-specific areas such as primary visual cortex that perform a very specific function.

    “emerging evidence indicates that many so-called “domain-general” areas engage in multiple functions, differing from “domain-specific” areas such as primary visual cortex that perform a very specific function (1, 2).”
  • Connectivity analyses provide direct evidence of neurophysiological mechanisms defining the roles of brain networks in cognition.

    “For example, although classical GLM-based approaches are often interpreted as indicating functional associations between regions, connectivity analyses provide direct evidence of neurophysiological mechanisms defining the roles of brain networks in cognition (2).”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fedorenko, E., & Thompson-Schill, S. L.
Affiliations
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Fedorenko, Evelina
Venue
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-03
Volume
18
Issue
3
Pages
120-126
ISSN
1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2060623117
Cited by
615
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 89 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 44 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 15
FWCI
4.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5k99hd057522-02, 5r01dc009209-15)
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R01-DC009209)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K99 HD-057522, R00HD057522)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
language network, functional specialization, brain networks, coactivation, neurobiology of language
MeSH terms
Brain, Humans, Language, Models, Neurological, Neural Pathways

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