Cited by 443Action Observation and SynchronizationFace Recognition and PerceptionChild and Animal Learning Development

Functional organization of social perception and cognition in the superior temporal sulcus

Open access
Deen, Ben, Koldewyn, Kami, Kanwisher, Nancy, Saxe, Rebecca·2015·Cerebral Cortex

Abstract

The superior temporal sulcus (STS) is considered a hub for social perception and cognition, including the perception of faces and human motion, as well as understanding others' actions, mental states, and language. However, the functional organization of the STS remains debated: Is this broad region composed of multiple functionally distinct modules, each specialized for a different process, or are STS subregions multifunctional, contributing to multiple processes? Is the STS spatially organized, and if so, what are the dominant features of this organization? We address these questions by measuring STS responses to a range of social and linguistic stimuli in the same set of human participants, using fMRI. We find a number of STS subregions that respond selectively to certain types of social input, organized along a posterior-to-anterior axis. We also identify regions of overlapping response to multiple contrasts, including regions responsive to both language and theory of mind, faces and voices, and faces and biological motion. Thus, the human STS contains both relatively domain-specific areas, and regions that respond to multiple types of social information.

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 · 10.1093/cercor/bhv111

Cites

71 of 71 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?

  • fMRI reveals that the language network responds reliably when people listen to, read, or generate sentences, but not when they perform arithmetic tasks, engage in logical reasoning, understand computer programs, listen to music, categorize objects or events, reason about people's mental states, or process non-verbal communicative information like facial expressions or gestures.

    “it responds reliably when people listen to, read, or generate sentences, but not when they perform arithmetic tasks, engage in logical reasoning, understand computer programs, listen to music, categorize objects or events, reason about people’s mental states, or process non-verbal communicative information like facial expressions or gestures [37, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48].”

    From Dissociating language and thought in large language models (2024) · cites this paper as [44]

  • The human brain has dedicated machinery for processing social information.

    “A wealth of neuroscientific evidence shows that the human brain has dedicated machinery for processing social information [44, 177].”

    From Dissociating language and thought in large language models (2024) · cites this paper as [44]

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
Deen, B., Koldewyn, K., Kanwisher, N., & Saxe, R.
Affiliations
McGovern Institute for Brain Research (US)
Corresponding author
Deen, Ben
Venue
Cerebral Cortex
Published
2015-06-05
Volume
25
Issue
11
Pages
4596-4609
ISSN
  • 1047-3211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2199
OpenAlex
W2206163921
Cited by
443
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 41 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 59 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 4
FWCI
47.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Cerebral Cortex (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bangor University Research Portal (Bangor University) (acceptedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Bangor University Research Portal (Bangor University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Oxford University Press eBooks
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1231216)
  • David and Lucile Packard Foundation
  • Ellison Medical Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
superior temporal sulcus, social perception, social cognition, functional organization, domain-specific processing, theory of mind, face perception, biological motion, language processing, voice perception
MeSH terms
Adult, Cognition, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Oxygen, Social Perception, Temporal Lobe, Visual Perception, Young Adult, Theory of Mind

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