CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 164Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismNeuroscience and Music PerceptionMultisensory perception and integration

The coupling between auditory and motor cortices is rate-restricted: Evidence for an intrinsic speech-motor rhythm

Open access
Assaneo, M. Florencia, Poeppel, David·2018·Science Advances
DOI 10.1126/sciadv.aao3842PMC PMC5810610

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Auditory-motor neural synchronization during perception is restricted to a narrow frequency range and enhanced at ~4.5 Hz.

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 · 10.1126/sciadv.aao3842

Cites

1 of 1 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?

  • Phase-locking of inner speech to theta-band oscillations has shown potential for decoding inner speech elicited by reading.

    “Phase-locking of IS to thetaband oscillations has shown potential for decoding IS elicited by reading [85], mirroring similar findings for overt speech [86].”

    From Inner speech as language process and cognitive tool (2023) · cites this paper as [85]

    In the citing sentence, this source appears to be [86], attached to the comparison with overt speech, not [85], attached to the inner-speech decoding claim. The Results report phase locking between auditory-cortex activity and the envelope of heard syllables, but the study does not show decoding or phase locking during overt speech production. Its Methods describe listening to syllables and a separate silent-mouthing task. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 48

  1. [1]Tremblay S., Shiller D. M., Ostry D. J., Somatosensory basis of speech production. Nature 423, 866– 869 (2003). 12815431
  2. [2]Hickok G., Houde J., Rong F., Sensorimotor integration in speech processing: Computational basis and neural organization. Neuron 69, 407– 422 (2011). 21315253 PMC3057382
  3. [3]F. H. Guenther, Neural Control of Speech (MIT Press, 2016).
  4. [4]Cheung C., Hamilton L. S., Johnson K., Chang E. F., The auditory representation of speech sounds in human motor cortex. eLife 5, e12577 (2016). 26943778 PMC4786411
  5. [5]Wilson S. M., Saygin A. P., Sereno M. I., Iacoboni M., Listening to speech activates motor areas involved in speech production. Nat. Neurosci. 7, 701– 702 (2004). 15184903
  6. [7]Du Y., Buchsbaum B. R., Grady C. L., Alain C., Noise differentially impacts phoneme representations in the auditory and speech motor systems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111, 7126– 7131 (2014). 24778251 PMC4024897
  7. [8]Meister I. G., Wilson S. M., Deblieck C., Wu A. D., Iacoboni M., The essential role of premotor cortex in speech perception. Curr. Biol. 17, 1692– 1696 (2007). 17900904 PMC5536895
  8. [9]Sato M., Tremblay P., Gracco V. L., A mediating role of the premotor cortex in phoneme segmentation. Brain Lang. 111, 1– 7 (2009). 19362734
  9. [10]Möttönen R., Dutton R., Watkins K. E., Auditory-motor processing of speech sounds. Cereb. Cortex 23, 1190– 1197 (2013). 22581846 PMC3615351
  10. [11]Ito T., Tiede M., Ostry D. J., Somatosensory function in speech perception. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106, 1245– 1248 (2009). 19164569 PMC2633542
  11. [12]Bruderer A. G., Danielson D. K., Kandhadai P., Werker J. F., Sensorimotor influences on speech perception in infancy. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 112, 13531– 13536 (2015). 26460030 PMC4640749
  12. [13]G. Buzsáki, in Rhythms of the Brain (Oxford Univ. Press, 2009), pp. 1–464.
  13. [14]Ahissar E., Nagarajan S., Ahissar M., Protopapas A., Mahncke H., Merzenich M. M., Speech comprehension is correlated with temporal response patterns recorded from auditory cortex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 98, 13367– 13372 (2001). 11698688 PMC60877
  14. [15]Luo H., Poeppel D., Phase patterns of neuronal responses reliably discriminate speech in human auditory cortex. Neuron 54, 1001– 1010 (2007). 17582338 PMC2703451
  15. [16]Lakatos P., Chen C.-M., O’Connell M. N., Mills A., Schroeder C. E., Neuronal oscillations and multisensory interaction in primary auditory cortex. Neuron 53, 279– 292 (2007). 17224408 PMC3717319
  16. [17]Henry M. J., Obleser J., Frequency modulation entrains slow neural oscillations and optimizes human listening behavior. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109, 20095– 20100 (2012). 23151506 PMC3523826
  17. [18]Peelle J. E., Gross J., Davis M. H., Phase-locked responses to speech in human auditory cortex are enhanced during comprehension. Cereb. Cortex 23, 1378– 1387 (2013). 22610394 PMC3643716
  18. [19]Doelling K. B., Arnal L. H., Ghitza O., Poeppel D., Acoustic landmarks drive delta–theta oscillations to enable speech comprehension by facilitating perceptual parsing. Neuroimage 85, 761– 768 (2014). 23791839 PMC3839250
  19. [20]Alho J., Lin F.-H., Sato M., Tiitinen H., Sams M., Jääskeläinen I. P., Enhanced neural synchrony between left auditory and premotor cortex is associated with successful phonetic categorization. Front Psychol. 5, 394 (2014). 24834062 PMC4018533
  20. [21]Park H., Ince R. A. A., Schyns P. G., Thut G., Gross J., Frontal top-down signals increase coupling of auditory low-frequency oscillations to continuous speech in human listeners. Curr. Biol. 25, 1649– 1653 (2015). 26028433 PMC4503802
  21. [22]Ding N., Patel A. D., Chen L., Butler H., Luo C., Poeppel D., Temporal modulations in speech and music. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 81, 181– 187 (2017). 28212857
  22. [23]Pulvermüller F., Huss M., Kherif F., del Prado Martin F. M., Hauk O., Shtyrov Y., Motor cortex maps articulatory features of speech sounds. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103, 7865– 7870 (2006). 16682637 PMC1472536
  23. [24]Wilson H. R., Cowan J. D., Excitatory and inhibitory interactions in localized populations of model neurons. Biophys. J. 12, 1– 24 (1972). 4332108 PMC1484078
  24. [25]Goldin M. A., Alonso L. M., Alliende J. A., Goller F., Mindlin G. B., Temperature induced syllable breaking unveils nonlinearly interacting timescales in birdsong motor pathway. PLOS ONE 8, e67814 (2013). 23818988 PMC3688611
  25. [26]Ozeki H., Finn I. M., Schaffer E. S., Miller K. D., Ferster D., Inhibitory stabilization of the cortical network underlies visual surround suppression. Neuron 62, 578– 592 (2009). 19477158 PMC2691725
  26. [27]Marcos E., Pani P., Brunamonti E., Deco G., Ferraina S., Verschure P., Neural variability in premotor cortex is modulated by trial history and predicts behavioral performance. Neuron 78, 249– 255 (2013). 23622062
  27. [28]F. C. Hoppensteadt, E. M. Izhikevich, Weakly Connected Neural Networks (Springer Science & Business Media, 1997).
  28. [29]Tripathy S. J., Burton S. D., Geramita M., Gerkin R. C., Urban N. N., Brain-wide analysis of electrophysiological diversity yields novel categorization of mammalian neuron types. J. Neurophysiol. 113, 3474– 3489 (2015). 25810482 PMC4455486
  29. [30]Black J. W., The effect of delayed side-tone upon vocal rate and intensity. J. Speech Disord. 16, 56– 60 (1951). 14804702
  30. [31]Lotto A. J., Hickok G. S., Holt L. L., Reflections on mirror neurons and speech perception. Trends Cogn. Sci. 13, 110– 114 (2009). 19223222 PMC2921844
  31. [32]Pulvermüller F., Fadiga L., Active perception: Sensorimotor circuits as a cortical basis for language. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 11, 351– 360 (2010). 20383203
  32. [33]Singer W., Dynamic formation of functional networks by synchronization. Neuron 69, 191– 193 (2011). 21262459
  33. [34]Ghitza O., Behavioral evidence for the role of cortical θ oscillations in determining auditory channel capacity for speech. Front Psychol. 5, 652 (2014). 25071631 PMC4082093
  34. [35]Dupoux E., Green K., Perceptual adjustment to highly compressed speech: Effects of talker and rate changes. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 23, 914– 927 (1997). 9180050
  35. [36]Giraud A.-L., Kleinschmidt A., Poeppel D., Lund T. E., Frackowiak R. S. J., Laufs H., Endogenous cortical rhythms determine cerebral specialization for speech perception and production. Neuron 56, 1127– 1134 (2007). 18093532
  36. [37]Chandrasekaran C., Trubanova A., Stillittano S., Caplier A., Ghazanfar A. A., The natural statistics of audiovisual speech. PLOS Comput. Biol. 5, e1000436 (2009). 19609344 PMC2700967
  37. [38]MacNeilage P. F., The frame/content theory of evolution of speech production. Behav. Brain Sci. 21, 499– 546 (1998). 10097020
  38. [39]Chevillet M. A., Jiang X., Rauschecker J. P., Riesenhuber M., Automatic phoneme category selectivity in the dorsal auditory stream. J. Neurosci. 33, 5208– 5215 (2013). 23516286 PMC6704978
  39. [40]Lewis J. W., Brefczynski J. A., Phinney R. E., Janik J. J., DeYoe E. A., Distinct cortical pathways for processing tool versus animal sounds. J. Neurosci. 25, 5148– 5158 (2005). 15917455 PMC6724809
  40. [41]Bangert M., Peschel T., Schlaug G., Rotte M., Drescher D., Hinrichs H., Heinze H.-J., Altenmüller E., Shared networks for auditory and motor processing in professional pianists: Evidence from fMRI conjunction. Neuroimage 30, 917– 926 (2006). 16380270
  41. [42]Bengtsson S. L., Ullén F., Ehrsson H. H., Hashimoto T., Kito T., Naito E., Forssberg H., Sadato N., Listening to rhythms activates motor and premotor cortices. Cortex 45, 62– 71 (2009). 19041965
  42. [44]Oostenveld R., Fries P., Maris E., Schoffelen J.-M., FieldTrip: Open source software for advanced analysis of MEG, EEG, and invasive electrophysiological data. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2011, 156869 2011. 21253357 PMC3021840
  43. [45]Adachi Y., Shimogawara M., Higuchi M., Haruta Y., Ochiai M., Reduction of non-periodic environmental magnetic noise in MEG measurement by continuously adjusted least squares method. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 11, 669– 672 (2001).
  44. [46]de Cheveigné A., Simon J. Z., Denoising based on time-shift PCA. J. Neurosci. Methods 165, 297– 305 (2007). 17624443 PMC2018742
  45. [47]Dale A. M., Liu A. K., Fischl B. R., Buckner R. L., Belliveau J. W., Lewine J. D., Halgren E., Dynamic statistical parametric mapping: Combining fMRI and MEG for high-resolution imaging of cortical activity. Neuron 26, 55– 67 (2000). 10798392
  46. [48]Salmelin R., Schnitzler A., Schmitz F., Freund H.-J., Single word reading in developmental stutterers and fluent speakers. Brain 123, 1184– 1202 (2000). 10825357
  47. [50]Ghuman A. S., McDaniel J. R., Martin A., A wavelet-based method for measuring the oscillatory dynamics of resting-state functional connectivity in MEG. Neuroimage 56, 69– 77 (2011). 21256967 PMC3391564
  48. [51]Vinck M., Oostenveld R., Van Wingerden M., Battaglia F., Pennartz C. M. A., An improved index of phase-synchronization for electrophysiological data in the presence of volume-conduction, noise and sample-size bias. Neuroimage 55, 1548– 1565 (2011). 21276857

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Assaneo, M. F., & Poeppel, D.
Affiliations
  • New York University (US)
  • Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics (DE)
Corresponding author
Assaneo, M. Florencia
ORCID
Venue
Science Advances
Publisher
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
Published
2018-02-02
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
eaao3842-eaao3842
ISSN
2375-2548 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1126/sciadv.aao3842
PMC
PMC5810610
OpenAlex
W2789751179
Cited by
164
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 6
FWCI
8.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Science Advances (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (award339452, 2R01DC05660)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
Keywords
speech perception, auditory-motor coupling, sensorimotor interaction, speech rate, neural oscillations, cortical synchronization, syllable rate, neural modeling, perception and action
MeSH terms
Adult, Auditory Cortex, Female, Humans, Male, Models, Neurological, Motor Cortex, Speech, Magnetoencephalography, Young Adult

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