Cited by 58Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismReading and Literacy DevelopmentLanguage Development and Disorders

Temporal dissociation of early lexical access and articulation using a delayed naming task—an FMRI study

Kemeny, Stefan, Xu, Jiang, Park, Grace H., Hosey, Lara A., Wettig, Carla M., Braun, Allen R.·2006·Cerebral Cortex

Abstract

Neuroimaging studies of overt speech hold an important practical advantage allowing monitoring of subject performance, particularly valuable in disorders like aphasia. However, speech production is not a monotonic process but a complex sequence of stages. Levelt and colleagues have described these as roughly corresponding to two originally independent systems--conceptual and sensorimotor--that are linked in the formulation and expression of spoken language. In the initial stages a word is chosen to match a concept (lexical selection); in the later stages the sound and motor patterns are encoded and the word is uttered (articulation). It has been difficult to discriminate these stages using conventional neuroimaging techniques. We designed a functional magnetic resonance imaging study in an attempt to do this, by introducing a latency into a conventional naming paradigm, delaying the articulated response. Our results showed that left hemisphere perisylvian areas were active throughout, interacting with visual and heteromodal areas during early lexical access and with motor and auditory areas during overt articulation. These results are consistent with the broadest version of the Levelt model and with that derived from Chomsky's minimalist program in which a core language system interacts with conceptual-intentional systems and articulatory-perceptual systems during the early and late stages of lexical access respectively.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/cercor/bhj006

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Kemeny, S., Xu, J., Park, G. H., Hosey, L. A., Wettig, C. M., & Braun, A. R.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Venue
Cerebral Cortex
Published
2005-07-27
Volume
16
Issue
4
Pages
587-595
ISSN
  • 1047-3211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2199
OpenAlex
W2165269353
Cited by
58
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cerebral Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (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 › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
Keywords
lexical access, speech articulation, perisylvian cortex, left hemisphere, auditory cortex, motor cortex, visual cortex, aphasia, Minimalist Program
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Concept Formation, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Language, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Reaction Time, Semantics, Speech

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