The neural substrates of writing: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study
Abstract
Background: Hypotheses regarding the neural substrates of writing have been derived from the study of individuals with acquired agraphia. Functional neuroimaging offers another methodology to test these hypotheses in neurologically intact individuals. Aims: This study was designed to identify possible neural substrates for the linguistic and motor components of writing in normal English-speaking individuals. Methods & Procedures: Functional magnetic resonance imaging was used with 12 adults to examine activation associated with generative writing of words from semantic categories contrasted with writing letters of the alphabet and drawing circles. In addition, the generative writing condition was contrasted with a subvocal generative naming condition. Outcomes & Results: Semantically guided retrieval of orthographic word forms for the generative writing condition revealed activation in the left inferior and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, as well as the left posterior inferior temporal lobe (BA 37). However, no activation was detected in the left angular gyrus (BA 39). The motor components of writing were associated with activation in left fronto-parietal cortex including the region of the intraparietal sulcus, superior parietal lobule, dorsolateral and medial premotor cortex, and sensorimotor areas for the hand. Conclusions: These observations suggest an important role of the left posterior inferior temporal cortex in lexical-orthographic processing and fail to support the long-held notion that the dominant angular gyrus is the storage site for orthographic representations of familiar words. Our findings also demonstrate the involvement of left superior parietal and frontal premotor regions in translating orthographic information into appropriate hand movements.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Beeson et al. demonstrated a distinct functional specialization of the left superior parietal cortex for handwriting.
“For instance, in an fMRI study on 12 right-handed adults, Beeson et al. [18] demonstrated a distinct functional specialization of the left superior parietal cortex for handwriting.”
From The Neuroscience Behind Writing: Handwriting vs. Typing—Who Wins the Battle? (2025) · cites this paper as [18]
The ventral occipitotemporal cortex, including the visual word form area (VWFA), integrates the recognition and interpretation of written symbols.
“The ventral occipitotemporal cortex, including the so-called “visual word form area” (VWFA), integrates the recognition and interpretation of written symbols.”
From The Neuroscience Behind Writing: Handwriting vs. Typing—Who Wins the Battle? (2025) · cites this paper as [18]
Handwriting and typing both depend on shared neural pathways for visual and orthographic processing.
“Despite these differences, handwriting and typing both depend on shared neural pathways for visual and orthographic processing.”
From The Neuroscience Behind Writing: Handwriting vs. Typing—Who Wins the Battle? (2025) · cites this paper as [18]
Cites
Beauregard, M., Chertkow, H., Bub, D., Murtha, S., Dixon, R., & Evans, A. (1997) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn.1997.9.4.441 · Cited by 191 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Neuroscience Behind Writing: Handwriting vs. Typing—Who Wins the Battle?
Marano, G., Kotzalidis, G. D., Lisci, F. M., Anesini, M. B., Rossi, S., Barbonetti, S., Cangini, A., Ronsisvalle, A., Artuso, L., Falsini, C., et al. (2025) · Life · doi:10.3390/life15030345 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
- Authors
- Beeson, P., Rapcsak, S., Plante, E., Chargualaf, J., Chung, A., Johnson, S., & Trouard, T.
- Affiliations
- a The University of Arizona, Tuscon, AZ, USA
- University of Arizona (US)
- Barrow Neurological Institute (US)
- Venue
- Aphasiology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2003-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 6-7
- Pages
- 647-665
- ISSN
- 0268-7038 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-5041
- OpenAlex
- W1990047271
- Cited by
- 151
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 1.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Aphasiology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
- Keywords
- writing, neural correlates, angular gyrus, orthographic representation, intraparietal sulcus, premotor cortex, superior parietal lobule, agraphia
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