The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 1 of the 91 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
The visual word form area: expertise for reading in the fusiform gyrus
Abstract
Brain imaging studies reliably localize a region of visual cortex that is especially responsive to visual words. This brain specialization is essential to rapid reading ability because it enhances perception of words by becoming specifically tuned to recurring properties of a writing system. The origin of this specialization poses a challenge for evolutionary accounts involving innate mechanisms for functional brain organization. We propose an alternative account, based on studies of other forms of visual expertise (i.e. bird and car experts) that lead to functional reorganization. We argue that the interplay between the unique demands of word reading and the structural constraints of the visual system lead to the emergence of the Visual Word Form Area.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
The paper reviews evidence that a left fusiform region, the Visual Word Form Area (VWFA), is reliably activated by visual words and shows abstract, prelexical tuning to orthographic structure. It proposes that this specialization arises through reading-driven perceptual expertise rather than an innate word-recognition module.
Key findings
- The VWFA localizes to the left occipitotemporal sulcus bordering the fusiform gyrus, with a group peak at approximately x = −43, y = −54, z = −12 mm; this peak is found in over 90% of individual subject scans, with a standard deviation of <5 mm.
- The region responds to visual words and pseudowords more than control stimuli, shows case/font/size and left–right visual-field invariance, is activated even without awareness, and is sensitive to orthographic regularity but generally not to lexical frequency or real-versus-pseudoword contrasts.
- The authors argue the VWFA is a case of perceptual expertise: writing is only ~5400 years old, too recent for dedicated evolutionary selection, and VWFA activity correlates with grapheme–phoneme decoding ability even when age is controlled.
- Neuropsychological evidence links pure alexia and left-visual-field word-reading deficits to damage or disconnection around the VWFA; adults with developmental dyslexia show reduced VWFA activation to words and pseudowords.
Methods
- Review and synthesis of prior neuroimaging studies (fMRI, PET, ERP, MEG, intracranial recordings), neuropsychological lesion evidence, developmental studies, and visual-expertise research; no new empirical data are presented.
- Localization claims draw on reviews of over 25 group experiments; developmental evidence includes children aged 7–18 years and behavioral/ERP studies in first-graders and older children.
- Main analysis is qualitative convergence across experimental contrasts and populations, leading to a proposed functional-anatomical model of visual word reading.
Limitations
- The paper does not include a formal limitations section. It states caveats: the term VWFA need not imply sole dedication to word recognition, object and face recognition can also activate this region, other regions can be modulated by visual word forms, and projections from the VWFA to lexical, semantic, and phonological systems are less clearly defined.
- Evident from the text: this is a review rather than a new experiment, some cited findings are “in press,” and the functional-anatomical model is described as tentative.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
53 Not checked yet · 24 Own interpretation · 1 Supported so far
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Case invariance holds even for upper and lowercase letters that share no visual similarity but are related only by arbitrary cultural convention (e.g. a and A, g and G) [22,23].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [22] McCandliss, 2000, Habituating cognitive codes for individual words within the visual word form area: an event related fMRI study, J. Cogn. Neurosci. Suppl.
- Supportedcites [23] Dehaene, S. et al. (2003) Letter binding and invariant recognition of masked words: behavioral and neuroimaging evidence. Psychol. Sci. (in press). source
The ‘Behavioral and neuroimaging evidence’ section describes A and a as having radically different shapes and an essentially arbitrary correspondence. The Results report significant cross-case priming for words made of visually dissimilar letters, supporting case-invariant recognition despite that difference. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The origin of this specialization poses a challenge for evolutionary accounts involving innate mechanisms for functional brain organization.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Writing was invented about 5400 years ago.
- Rests on an assumption: 5400 years is insufficient time for selective pressures to engineer a specialized module for visual word recognition.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We argue that the interplay between the unique demands of word reading and the structural constraints of the visual system lead to the emergence of the Visual Word Form Area.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Several lines of cognitive evidence indicate that the perceptual mechanisms that support word recognition rest on a critical process that groups the letters of a word together into an integrated perceptual unit (i.e. a 'visual word form').”
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Brain imaging studies reliably localize a region of visual cortex that is especially responsive to visual words.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Cohen, 2002, Language-specific tuning of visual cortex? Functional properties of the visual word form area, Brain source
- Not checked yetcites [9] Cohen, 2000, The visual word form area: spatial and temporal characterization of an initial stage of reading in normal subjects and posterior split-brain patients, Brain source
- Not checked yetcites [10] Polk, 2002, Functional MRI evidence for an abstract, not perceptual, word-form area, J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. source
- Not checked yetcites [11] Dehaene, 2002, The visual word form area: a prelexical representation of visual words in the fusiform gyrus, Neuroreport source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Within less than 250 ms of viewing a written word, the visual system extracts the information needed to identify its linguistic significance, despite wide variations in print, script, font, size and retinal position.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] Rayner, 1989
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Literate adults possess a special form of visual expertise that allows their visual system to process words efficiently.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] Rayner, 1989
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This brain specialization is essential to rapid reading ability because it enhances perception of words by becoming specifically tuned to recurring properties of a writing system.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The response properties of the VWFA demonstrate a form of tuning to learned letter stimuli, which produce greater activity than well-controlled pseudoletters, that can be measured by blocks of PET data [19], as well by the first 200 ms of activity in MEG and intracranial electrical recordings [16].”
What the sources say
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nevertheless, we argue that this region of the visual system must contain a population of neurons that, as an ensemble, is tuned to invariant stimulus properties and structural regularities characteristic of written words.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Consistent with the rapid time course of visual word recognition, event-related potentials (ERPs) recorded over left posterior visual regions within 150-200 ms demonstrate sensitivity to words relative to other stimuli that control for visual features [12,13].”
What the sources say
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“For example, the VWFA shows equally robust fMRI responses when words (versus control stimuli) are presented in a familiar format (e.g. 'table') and in a perceptually novel mixed-case format (e.g. 'tAbLe') [10].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [10] Polk, 2002, Functional MRI evidence for an abstract, not perceptual, word-form area, J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We argue that the VWFA corresponds to a specific visual process, rather than a more linguistic multimodal one.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We propose that a large body of converging evidence from neuroimaging studies now exists to link the psychological process of abstract visual word form perception with a particular cortical region within the left fusiform gyrus.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, it demonstrates a sublexical sensitivity to the orthographic regularities by which letters form words.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Cohen, 2002, Language-specific tuning of visual cortex? Functional properties of the visual word form area, Brain source
- Not checked yetcites [13] McCandliss, 1997, Brain plasticity in learning visual words, Cogn. Psychol. source
- Not checked yetcites [26] Ziegler, 1997, Word, pseudoword and nonword processing: a multitask comparison using event-related-potentials, J. Cogn. Neurosci. source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although nearby regions are active in word tasks that involve nonvisual modalities [17], such regions are typically significantly more anterior than the VWFA [8].”
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The VWFA produces measurable responses to words, even under conditions that prevent awareness of the visual presentation of a word [18] (Fig. 2).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [18] Dehaene, 2001, Cerebral mechanisms of word masking and unconscious repetition priming, Nat. Neurosci. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“TheVWFAisgenerallyinsensitive to factors that influence lexical access, such as contrasts between high- and lowfrequency words [24], or between real and pseudowords, as revealed by event-related fMRI analyses [11,23,25].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [24] Fiebach, 2002, fMRI evidence for dual routes to the mental lexicon in visual word recognition, J. Cogn. Neurosci. source
- Not checked yetcites [11] Dehaene, 2002, The visual word form area: a prelexical representation of visual words in the fusiform gyrus, Neuroreport source
- Not checked yetcites [23] Dehaene, S. et al. (2003) Letter binding and invariant recognition of masked words: behavioral and neuroimaging evidence. Psychol. Sci. (in press). source
- Not checked yetcites [25] Beauregard, 1997, The neural substrate for concrete, abstract, and emotional word lexica: a positron emission tomography study, J. Cogn. Neurosci. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Furthermore, individual subjects' accuracy at speeded letter recognition systematically correlates with the level of activation in the VWFA [20].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [20] Garrett, 2000, Cortical activity related to accuracy of letter recognition, Neuroimage source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Perception of visual words and pseudowords reliably activates the left fusiform gyrus to a greater degree than other highly similar control stimuli.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7] Fiez, 1998, Neuroimaging studies of word reading, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. source
- Not checked yetcites [8] Cohen, 2002, Language-specific tuning of visual cortex? Functional properties of the visual word form area, Brain source
- Not checked yetcites [9] Cohen, 2000, The visual word form area: spatial and temporal characterization of an initial stage of reading in normal subjects and posterior split-brain patients, Brain source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Based on reviews of over 25 group experiments, the peak of the visual word form area is located at approximately x ¼ 2 43, y ¼ 2 54, z ¼ 2 12 (mm, to the left, posterior, and below the anterior commissure, respectively) [8].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Cohen, 2002, Language-specific tuning of visual cortex? Functional properties of the visual word form area, Brain source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the 'word superiority effect' demonstrates that a single target letter is identified more efficiently in the context of a well-structured word than within a randomly structured letter string or a letter in isolation [3].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3] Reicher, 1969, Perceptual recognition as a function of meaninfulness of stimulus material, J. Exp. Psychol. source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In the VWFA, however, fMRI responses to words versus control stimuli are equivalent across both visual fields [9] (Fig. 1b).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] Cohen, 2000, The visual word form area: spatial and temporal characterization of an initial stage of reading in normal subjects and posterior split-brain patients, Brain source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Novel, but well-structured letter strings (i.e. pseudowords), produce more robust fMRI responses than novel but poorly structured letter strings [8].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Cohen, 2002, Language-specific tuning of visual cortex? Functional properties of the visual word form area, Brain source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This response property has been associated with a leftlateralized ERP component recorded over left inferior temporal cortex , 250 ms after a word is presented to the left or right visual field [9,21].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] Cohen, 2000, The visual word form area: spatial and temporal characterization of an initial stage of reading in normal subjects and posterior split-brain patients, Brain source
- Not checked yetcites [21] Posner, 1999, Brain circuitry during reading
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similar phenomena have been demonstrated within the first 200 ms of stimulus processing within ERP and MEG responses associated with the left ventrotemporal region [13,26,27].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] McCandliss, 1997, Brain plasticity in learning visual words, Cogn. Psychol. source
- Not checked yetcites [26] Ziegler, 1997, Word, pseudoword and nonword processing: a multitask comparison using event-related-potentials, J. Cogn. Neurosci. source
- Not checked yetcites [27] Breier, 1998, Relative timing of neuronal activity in distinct temporal lobe areas during a recognition memory task for words, J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol. source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similar results have also been found with magneto-encephalography (MEG) [14,15] and intracranial electrical recordings [16] that provide increasingly specific localization information that is consistent with the fMRI findings for the VWFA.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [14] Helenius, 1999, Dissociation of normal feature analysis and deficient processing of letter-strings in dyslexic adults, Cereb. Cortex source
- Not checked yetcites [15] Tarkiainen, 2002, Dynamics of visual feature analysis and object-level processing in face versus letter-string perception, Brain source
- Not checked yetcites [16] Nobre, 1994, Word recognition in the human inferior temporal lobe, Nature source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Furthermore, when a word is repeated immediately, fMRI and N200 ERP responses associated with the VWFA demonstrate sensitivity to word repetition that is independent of changes in letter case [18,21].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [18] Dehaene, 2001, Cerebral mechanisms of word masking and unconscious repetition priming, Nat. Neurosci. source
- Not checked yetcites [21] Posner, 1999, Brain circuitry during reading
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This indicates that the abstract processes of the VWFA go beyond size and shape normalization and have become attuned to the specific demands of reading.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Passive presentation of spoken words elicits no response in this region [11].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [11] Dehaene, 2002, The visual word form area: a prelexical representation of visual words in the fusiform gyrus, Neuroreport source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together, these effects support the existence of a level of perceptual processing that extracts invariant information about the structure of visual words and integrates this information into a perceptual object.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Furthermore, combined optical imaging and single-cell recordings suggest that the IT cortex is composed of a mosaic of neuronal patches that respond to elementary shapes, whose combination can encode arbitrary objects [39,42].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [39] Tanaka, 2003, Columns for complex visual object features in inferotemporal cortex: clustering of cells with similar but slightly different stimulus selectivities, Cereb. Cortex source
- Not checked yetcites [42] Tsunoda, 2001, Complex objects are represented in macaque inferotemporal cortex by the combination of feature columns, Nat. Neurosci. source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The emergence of perceptual expertise in several visual domains (i.e. bird experts, car experts) has been linked to enhanced perception of category members via an increased ability to integrate information across the entire stimulus [31].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [31] Rossion, 2000, The N170 occipito-temporal component is delayed and enhanced to inverted faces but not to inverted objects: an electrophysiological account of face-specific processes in the human brain, Neuroreport source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Such findings suggest that successful mastery of graphemephonemeconversion (i.e. decoding) is a critical precursor to the development of the adult-like response properties of the VWFA.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [36] Shaywitz, 2002, Disruption of posterior brain systems for reading in children with developmental dyslexia, Biol. Psychiatry source
- Not checked yetcites [37] Share, 1999, Phonological recoding and orthographic learning: a direct test of the self-teaching hypothesis, J. Exp. Child Psychol. source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Two gradients of selectivity that cut across all areas of the ventral visual system have been identified [43].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [43] Malach, 2002, The topography of high-order human object areas, Trends Cogn. Sci. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“They also exhibit learning phenomena, even for essentially arbitrary figures [41].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [41] Logothetis, 2000, Object recognition: holistic representations in the monkey brain, Spat. Vis. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The progressive development of the VWFA seems closely tied to the progression of skill, rather than being merely a matter of maturation.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, we propose that the VWFA occupies a reproducible location on these gradients because this region best meets dual requirements of fine foveal discriminationandinvariantrecognitionofletter-andwordsize units.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We point out the presence of convergent evidence that links the psychological effects that are critical to expert-level visual word form perception with the response properties of a particular cortical region that can be systematically identified and probed.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Strikingly, the regions that show particular responsivity to objects, faces, or houses occupy reproducible locations within those gradients, corresponding to the differential requirements that they put on peripheral or foveal vision [43].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [43] Malach, 2002, The topography of high-order human object areas, Trends Cogn. Sci. source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“These processing benefits are linked to functional reorganizations in the response properties of a region of the right fusiform gyrus [32], which are also associated with changes in the response properties of ERPs recorded within the first 200 ms of processing stimuli [33].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [32] Gauthier, 2000, Expertise for cars and birds recruits brain areas involved in face recognition, Nat. Neurosci. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These shapes must have been selected, in the course of phylogenetic and/or ontogenetic evolution, for their ability to provide a combinatorial code capable of representing many different objects.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“Furthermore, training effects in reading-impaired children have recently been linked to changes in fMRI activation, including posterior occipitotemporal regions in the vicinity of the VWFA [38], as children attempt to link letters to sounds.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [38] Temple, 2003, Neural deficits in children with dyslexia ameliorated by behavioral remediation: evidence from functional fMRI, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Remarkably, some of those primitive shapes closely resemble printed or handwritten characters, such as T junctions, a figure-of-eight, a star, and so forth [39].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [39] Tanaka, 2003, Columns for complex visual object features in inferotemporal cortex: clustering of cells with similar but slightly different stimulus selectivities, Cereb. Cortex source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It also predicts that, over the course of development, individual differences in VWFA activity should be more closely tied to expertise than to maturation.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Taken together, the response properties of the VWFA are largely consistent with a proposed level of perceptual processing in word recognition that constructs an abstract representation of letters sequenced into word forms [28].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [28] Carr, 1995, The impact of learning to read on the functional anatomy of language processing
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Research with dyslexic adults indicates that, among other areas, the VWFA fails to increase its activity in response to word forms [44,45] (Box 3).”
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Over the course of years of extensive experience in extracting invariant information from visual word stimuli, perceptual processes are progressively reorganized, but only in those who become skilled readers.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“The locus of damage to the visual system leading to PA coincides with the Visual Word Form Area (VWFA) (see Fig. I).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [47] Binder, 1992, The topography of callosal reading pathways. a case-control analysis, Brain source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Pure alexia (PA; also known as 'word form dyslexia' or 'letter-byletter reading') results in an impaired ability to read words in a rapid, parallel fashion [46,47].”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We propose here that the VWFA constitutes a special case of perceptual expertise, in which extensive visual experience with a class of stimuli drives enhancement of perceptual mechanisms and changes in the supporting functional architecture in the left fusiform gyrus (see discussion on laterality issues below).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“Activation levels of the VWFA and other nearby regions were positively correlated with standardized scores in grapheme-phoneme decoding ability, even when the effects of age were taken into account.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [36] Shaywitz, 2002, Disruption of posterior brain systems for reading in children with developmental dyslexia, Biol. Psychiatry source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In closing, we argue that the emergence of expertise in visual word recognition can be understood as a minimal reconfiguration of the visual system to meet the specific requirements of expert reading.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The similarity between reading and other forms of acquired visual expertise emphasizes that our visual system progressively adapts to the tasks to which we put it.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Behavioral evidence on word perception supports the case for protracted development of perceptual expertise.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [34] Aghababian, 2000, Developing normal reading skills: aspects of the visual processes underlying word recognition, J. Exp. Child Psychol. source
- Not checked yetcites [4] Gibson, 1962, The role of grapheme–phoneme correspondence in the perception of words, Am. J. Psychol. source
- Not checked yetcites [21] Posner, 1999, Brain circuitry during reading
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such perceptual expertise effects demonstrate principled ways in which experience can influence the functional organization of posterior-perceptual regions of the visual system.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The capability of part of this region to become responsive to learned letters is thus no accident but reflects the evolutionary history of the visual system combined with experience-dependent adaptations.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“These processing benefits are linked to functional reorganizations in the response properties of a region of the right fusiform gyrus [32], which are also associated with changes in the response properties of ERPs recorded within the first 200 ms of processing stimuli [33].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [33] Tanaka, 2001, A neural basis for expert object recognition, Psychol. Sci. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Callosal lesions of fibers connecting the right-hemispheric visual regions to the VWFA provoke a subtype of PA restricted to words displayed in the left half of the visual field [9,50].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] Cohen, 2000, The visual word form area: spatial and temporal characterization of an initial stage of reading in normal subjects and posterior split-brain patients, Brain source
- Not checked yetcites [50] Molko, 2002, Visualizing the neural bases of a disconnection syndrome with diffusion tensor imaging, J. Cogn. Neurosci. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 16
- Probably not a substantial claim. 6
In the paper
“Chronometric studies show that the speed of word recognition is remarkably uninfluenced by the number of letters present in a 3-6-letter word, indicating a form of parallel processing of the letters [2].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2] Nazir, 1998, Letter legibility and visual word recognition, Mem. Cogn. source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Finally, converging neuropsychological evidence indicates that selective damage to the left fusiform region impairs visual but not auditory word recognition (Box 1).”
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This finding is robust enough to identify a significant peak of activation in over 90% of individual subject scans, with a standard deviation of , 5 mm [8-11] (Fig. 1).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Cohen, 2002, Language-specific tuning of visual cortex? Functional properties of the visual word form area, Brain source
- Not checked yetcites [9] Cohen, 2000, The visual word form area: spatial and temporal characterization of an initial stage of reading in normal subjects and posterior split-brain patients, Brain source
- Not checked yetcites [10] Polk, 2002, Functional MRI evidence for an abstract, not perceptual, word-form area, J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. source
- Not checked yetcites [11] Dehaene, 2002, The visual word form area: a prelexical representation of visual words in the fusiform gyrus, Neuroreport source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This process is highly sensitive to the abstract structural properties of the writing system, but largely insensitive to non-essential variations in visual features such as case and font [1].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] Rayner, 1989
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Finally, these perceptual operations adapt well to large variations in surface features of word stimuli, such as changes in size, case, and font, and demonstrate significant transfer of priming benefits across such variations [1].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] Rayner, 1989
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“IT neurons have vast receptive fields and respond selectively to certain objects or parts of objects across large changes in size, position and illumination [39,40].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [39] Tanaka, 2003, Columns for complex visual object features in inferotemporal cortex: clustering of cells with similar but slightly different stimulus selectivities, Cereb. Cortex source
- Not checked yetcites [40] Einhauser, 2002, Learning the invariance properties of complex cells from their responses to natural stimuli, Eur. J. Neurosci. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, inferotemporal (IT) cortex is well known for its role in invariant object recognition.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [39] Tanaka, 2003, Columns for complex visual object features in inferotemporal cortex: clustering of cells with similar but slightly different stimulus selectivities, Cereb. Cortex source
- Not checked yetcites [40] Einhauser, 2002, Learning the invariance properties of complex cells from their responses to natural stimuli, Eur. J. Neurosci. source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The hypothesis of a progressive specialization of the left VWFA over the course of reading acquisition avoids problems inherent to the notion of a ready-made 'word recognition module'.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Writing was invented about 5400 years ago.
- Rests on an assumption: 5400 years is insufficient time for selective pressures to engineer a specialized module for visual word recognition.
In the paper
“Although enhanced abilities to perceive well-structured letter strings appear early in the reading process, such effects are restricted to high-frequency words and do not generalize to novel strings until 10-13 years of age [4] (although see [35]).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4] Gibson, 1962, The role of grapheme–phoneme correspondence in the perception of words, Am. J. Psychol. source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Sensitivity to increasingly larger visual units varies along a posterior-toanterior gradient, whereas sensitivity to increasingly eccentric sectors of the retina varies along a lateral-tomesialgradient.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [43] Malach, 2002, The topography of high-order human object areas, Trends Cogn. Sci. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Much of the ventral processing stream is already well adapted to the invariant recognition of fine basic shapes in the fovea.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Unlike adults, 6- to 7-year-old children (American first-graders) demonstrate robust word-length effects, which gradually diminish over the following years but are still detectable as late as grade 5 (11-12 years old) [34].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [34] Aghababian, 2000, Developing normal reading skills: aspects of the visual processes underlying word recognition, J. Exp. Child Psychol. source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In contrast to global alexia, PA patients are able to identify single letters, and develop letter-by-letter reading strategies resulting in reading latencies that increase by hundreds of milliseconds for each additional letter [49].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [49] Cohen, L. et al. (2003) Visual word recognition in the left and right hemispheres: anatomical and functional correlates of peripheral alexias. Cereb. Cortex (in press). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Developmental studies of the N200 ERP responses to letter strings demonstrate a similar pattern, suggesting that 10-year-olds produce adult-like responses to highfrequency words but fail to generalize such responses to pseudowords [21].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [21] Posner, 1999, Brain circuitry during reading
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Such differences have not yet been associated with neuropathology in this region, but mayinstead reflect the absence of a specialization that accrues over the course of years of successful reading experience [55].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [55] McCandliss, B.D. and Noble, K. (2003) The development of reading impairment: a cognitive neuroscience model. Mental Retard. Dev. Disab. Res. Rev. (in press). source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This view on the origin of the VWFA implies that the specialization process should be protracted over a long period of experience and that the response properties of the VWFA should evolve in parallel with the rise of cognitive hallmarks of expertise.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although the precise projections from VWFA to systems involved in lexical, semantic and phonological processes are currently less clearly defined, functional areas probably include the left angular gyrus [52], left inferior frontal cortex [53], and temporal regions anterior to the VWFA [54].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [52] Horwitz, 1998, Functional connectivity of the angular gyrus in normal reading and dyslexia, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. source
- Not checked yetcites [53] Bokde, 2001, Functional interactions of the inferior frontal cortex during the processing of words and word-like stimuli, Neuron source
- Not checked yetcites [54] Giraud, 2001, The constraints functional neuroanatomy places on classical models of auditory word processing, J. Cogn. Neurosci. source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Separate pathways in left and right hemispheres are integrated in the left lateralized Visual Word Form Area (VWFA), which mediates between visually specific input, and moreabstract linguistic areas responsible for lexical, semantic and phonological processes.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, ventral visual regions receive top-down attentional influences associated with left and right parietal regions that are likely to affect all processing levels, and whose impairment might therefore lead to various forms of neglect dyslexia.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Writing was invented about 5400 years ago.
“given that the cultural invention of writing upon which this specialization is predicated did not exist until , 5400 years ago”
The paper relies on this without support.
5400 years is insufficient time for selective pressures to engineer a specialized module for visual word recognition.
“which is insufficient time for selective pressures to engineer a specialized 'module' for visual word recognition.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The VWFA is left lateralized in most subjects.
“Although the VWFA is left lateralized in most subjects”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“we used NeuroSynth to replicate previous findings of visual category-specific activation in regions such as the fusiform face area (FFA12) and visual word form area (VWFA13”
From Large-scale automated synthesis of human functional neuroimaging data. (2011) · cites this paper as [13]
In the citing paper
“Interestingly, the region of posterior temporal cortex more active for the letter than category fluency conditions overlaps with an area implicated by previous studies as being involved in the visual processing of word forms (i.e., the visual word form areas, VWFA; McCandliss et al., 2003), as well as with other word processing sites that appears to have a multimodal function; i.e., for combining”
From Neural systems supporting lexical search guided by letter and semantic category cues: a self-paced overt response fMRI study of verbal fluency (2010) · cites this paper as McCandliss et al., 2003
In the citing paper
“This cortex is partially plastic and can, during ontogenesis, become progressively attuned to the requirements of reading (McCandliss et al., 2003).”
From Specialization within the ventral stream: the case for the visual word form area (2004) · cites this paper as McCandliss et al., 2003
In the citing paper
“Finally, it should be remembered that it takes years for children to develop expert word recognition (Aghababian and Nazir, 2000), and that the emergence of this expertise correlates with the amount of activation of the VWFA by letter strings in normal and dyslexic children (McCandliss et al., 2003; Shaywitz et al., 2002; Temple, 2002).”
From Specialization within the ventral stream: the case for the visual word form area (2004) · cites this paper as McCandliss et al., 2003
In the citing paper
“The left-FFG was found to be involved in letter identification and reading (McCandliss et al., 2003; Dehaene and Cohen, 2011; McNorgan et al., 2013).”
From Functional neuroimaging of visuospatial working memory tasks enables accurate detection of attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (2015) · cites this paper as McCandliss et al., 2003
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.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ The perceptual expertise account · p. 4
“Subjects were engaged in a semantic classification task on target words and were not unaware of the presence of primes.”
§ The perceptual expertise account · p. 4
“This suggests that this area holds a case-invariant neural code for visual words and that this code can be activated automatically without awareness.”
Citations
Cites
The distributed human neural system for face perception
Haxby, J. V., Hoffman, E. A., & Gobbini, M. I. (2000) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01482-0 · Cited by 4,891
Cohen, L., Dehaene, S., Naccache, L., Lehéricy, S., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., Hénaff, M.-A., & Michel, F. (2000) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/123.2.291 · Cited by 1,954
Self-citationExpertise for cars and birds recruits brain areas involved in face recognition
Gauthier, I., Skudlarski, P., Gore, J. C., & Anderson, A. W. (2000) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/72140 · Cited by 1,418 · cited 1×
“These processing benefits are linked to functional reorganizations in the response properties of a region of the right fusiform gyrus [ 32 ], which are also associated with changes in the response properties of ERPs recorded within the first 200 ms of processing stimuli [33].”
BackgroundCerebral mechanisms of word masking and unconscious repetition priming
Dehaene, S., Naccache, L., Cohen, L., Bihan, D. L., Mangin, J.-F., Poline, J.-B., & Rivière, D. (2001) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/89551 · Cited by 1,305
Self-citationLanguage‐specific tuning of visual cortex? Functional properties of the Visual Word Form Area
Cohen, L., Lehéricy, S., Chochon, F., Lemer, C., Rivaud, S., & Dehaene, S. (2002) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awf094 · Cited by 1,254 · cited 4×
“pseudowords), produce more robust fMRI responses than novel but poorly structured letter strings [ 8 ].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationPerceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material
Reicher, G. M. (1969) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0027768 · Cited by 1,252
Dyslexia: Cultural Diversity and Biological Unity
Paulesu, E., Démonet, J.-F., Fazio, F., McCrory, E., Chanoine, V., Brunswick, N., Cappa, S. F., Cossu, G., Habib, M., Frith, C. D., et al. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1057179 · Cited by 1,173
Disruption of posterior brain systems for reading in children with developmental dyslexia
Shaywitz, B. A., Shaywitz, S. E., Pugh, K. R., Mencl, W. E., Fulbright, R. K., Skudlarski, P., Constable, R. T., Marchione, K. E., Fletcher, J. M., Lyon, G. R., et al. (2002) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s0006-3223(02)01365-3 · Cited by 993
Functional disruption in the organization of the brain for reading in dyslexia
Shaywitz, S. E., Shaywitz, B. A., Pugh, K. R., Fulbright, R. K., Constable, R. T., Mencl, W. E., Shankweiler, D. P., Liberman, A. M., Skudlarski, P., Fletcher, J. M., et al. (1998) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.95.5.2636 · Cited by 872
Temple, E., Deutsch, G. K., Poldrack, R. A., Miller, S. L., Tallal, P., Merzenich, M. M., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2003) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0030098100 · Cited by 796
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- McCandliss, 2000, Habituating cognitive codes for individual words within the visual word form area: an event related fMRI study, J. Cogn. Neurosci. Suppl., 118
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Large-scale automated synthesis of human functional neuroimaging data.
Yarkoni, T., Poldrack, R. A., Nichols, T. E., Van Essen, D. C., & Wager, T. D. (2011) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.1635 · Cited by 3,686
The Oxford Handbook of Event-Related Potential Components
(2011) · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195374148.001.0001 · Cited by 2,263
Lyon, G. R., Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2003) · Annals of Dyslexia · doi:10.1007/s11881-003-0001-9 · Cited by 1,914
Research on attention networks as a model for the integration of psychological science.
Posner, M. I., & Rothbart, M. K. (2007) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085516 · Cited by 1,569
How Can the Human Mind Occur in the Physical Universe?
Anderson, J. R. (2007) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195324259.001.0001 · Cited by 1,483
Metadata
- Authors
- McCandliss, B. D., Cohen, L., & Dehaene, S.
- Affiliations
- Cornell University (US)
- Inserm (FR)
- Corresponding author
- McCandliss, Bruce D.
- Venue
- Trends in Cognitive Sciences
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2003-07
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 293-299
- ISSN
- 1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2143709903
- Semantic Scholar
- efc50447601a00424b368385d84c969f5e00395f
- Cited by
- 1,489
- References
- 55
- Citations by year
- 2026: 41 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 63 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 84 · 2019: 84 · 2018: 65 · 2017: 61 · 2016: 71 · 2015: 79 · 2014: 85 · 2013: 66 · 2012: 78
- FWCI
- 8.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Keywords
- visual word form area, fusiform gyrus, reading, visual word recognition, visual expertise, functional reorganization, brain specialization, writing systems, visual cortex
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
