CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 107Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismPhonetics and Phonology ResearchNeuroscience and Music Perception

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cortical processing mechanism for vocalization with auditory verbal feedback

Hirano, Shigeru, Kojima, Hisayoshi, Naito, Yasushi, Honjo, Iwao, Kamoto, Yoko, Okazawa, Hidehiko, Ishizu, Koichi, Yonekura, Yoshiharu, Nagahama, Yasuhiro, Fukuyama, Hidenao, Konishi, Junji·1997·Neuroreport
DOI 10.1097/00001756-199707070-00055
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

To investigate the relationship between motor and sensory speech center, cortical activity was examined using PET while normal subjects perceived their own voice which sounded different to the articulated one. The results showed significant activation in the superior temporal gyri with absence of activity in the supplementary motor area (SMA). In a previous study we found significant activation in SMA with no activity in the superior temporal gyrus when normal subjects simply vocalized. Thus, two different cortical pathways for vocalization were delineated: programmed pathway in SMA, and pathway with auditory verbal feedback. The former is thought to be the mature system in the adult, and the latter may be related to speech acquisition.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00001756-199707070-00055

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

  • Processing of self-produced vocalisations in bilateral auditory cortices is less than that of another's speech unless the speech fed back is altered to make it different from the articulated voice.

    “Processing of self-produced vocalisations in bilateral auditory cortices was shown to be less than that of another's speech unless the speech fed back to the auditory system was altered to make it different from the articulated voice (Hirano et al., 1997).”

    From A review and synthesis of the first 20years of PET and fMRI studies of heard speech, spoken language and reading (2012) · cites this paper as Hirano et al., 1997

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Hirano, S., Kojima, H., Naito, Y., Honjo, I., Kamoto, Y., Okazawa, H., Ishizu, K., Yonekura, Y., Nagahama, Y., Fukuyama, H., & Konishi, J.
Affiliations
Kyoto University (JP)
ORCID
Venue
Neuroreport
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
1997-07
Volume
8
Issue
9
Pages
2379-2382
ISSN
0959-4965 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/00001756-199707070-00055
OpenAlex
W2111309670
Cited by
107
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuroreport (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
Keywords
vocalizations, superior temporal gyrus, supplementary motor area, speech motor control, speech perception, speech development, cortical activation, PET
MeSH terms
Adult, Auditory Perception, Feedback, Humans, Male, Somatosensory Cortex, Speech, Tomography, Emission-Computed

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