Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 160

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The cortical dynamics of speaking: present shortcomings and future avenues

Strijkers, Kristof, Costa, Albert·2016·Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

Abstract

A central question in the cognitive neuroscience of language production concerns the cortical activation time-course by which different word production components become available to the speaker. According to the dominant neurocognitive model of word production, this is achieved in a sequential fashion where each of the linguistic components involved in speaking has its specific time-course and dedicated processing centre in the brain [Indefrey, P., & Levelt, W. J. M. (2004). The spatial and temporal signatures of word production components. Cognition, 92(1–2), 101–144. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2002.06.001]. Language production would initiate with lexico-semantic processes reflected in posterior brain regions and slowly move “upwards” through the representational formats until an articulatory programme is activated in anterior brain regions. In this opinion piece, we raise three critical issues aimed at questioning the strict feedforward and serial conceptualisation of the spatiotemporal dynamics engendering word production. Concretely, we address the following three topics: (1) Are the data supporting the model or the model supporting the data? We conclude that, despite the evidence supporting the notion of some local sequentiality underpinning speech preparation in the brain, there is insufficient explicit spatiotemporal evidence to support the notion that such local sequenciality by itself is enough to explain how the brain computes language; (2) What is the role of top-down processing on the spatiotemporal dynamics? We argue that if top-down processes such as goal-directed behaviour and attention can proactively modulate the linguistic system, the spatiotemporal correlates of word production components should likewise be regarded as context-depend and speaker-adaptive; (3) Can we map psycholinguistic stages onto the brain in a one-to-one fashion? We advocate to start considering, above and beyond the feedforward anatomical connectedness that underpin traditional sequential hierarchical models, other types of neural communication such as neural coherence, feedback projections and reverberatory brain activity in order to mechanistically explain how basic brain properties sustain language production.

Overview

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 · 10.1080/23273798.2015.1120878

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 34 references

Cited by

See all 160

Metadata

Authors
Strijkers, K., & Costa, A.
Venue
Language, Cognition and Neuroscience
Published
2016-01-22
Volume
31
Issue
4
Pages
484-503
ISSN
  • 2327-3798 (ISSN-L)
  • 2327-3801
OpenAlex
W2341173943
Cited by
160
References
34
FWCI
7.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The cortical dynamics of speaking: present shortcomings and future avenues. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/23273798.2015.1120878
The paper
Strijkers, K., & Costa, A. (2016). The cortical dynamics of speaking: present shortcomings and future avenues. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1120878

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.