Cited by 163Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismNeuroscience and Music PerceptionPhonetics and Phonology Research

The Constraints Functional Neuroimaging Places on Classical Models of Auditory Word Processing

Open access
Giraud, A. L., Price, C. J.·2001·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

Several previous functional imaging experiments have demonstrated that auditory presentation of speech, relative to tones or scrambled speech, activate the superior temporal sulci (STS) bilaterally. In this study, we attempted to segregate the neural responses to phonological, lexical, and semantic input by contrasting activation elicited by heard words, meaningless syllables, and environmental sounds. Inevitable differences between the duration and amplitude of each stimulus type were controlled with auditory noise bursts matched to each activation stimulus. Half the subjects were instructed to say "okay" in response to presentation of all stimuli. The other half repeated back the words and syllables, named the source of the sounds, and said "okay" to the control stimuli (noise bursts). We looked for stimulus effects that were consistent across task. The results revealed that central regions in the STS were equally responsive to speech (words and syllables) and familiar sounds, whereas the posterior and anterior regions of the left superior temporal gyrus were more active for speech. The effect of semantic input was small but revealed more activation in the inferior temporal cortex for words and familiar sounds than syllables and noise. In addition, words (relative to syllables, sounds, and noise) enhanced activation in the temporo-parietal areas that have previously been linked to modality independent semantic processing. Thus, in cognitive terms, we dissociate phonological (speech) and semantic responses and propose that word specificity arises from functional integration among shared phonological and semantic areas.

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 · 10.1162/08989290152541421

Cites

57 of 57 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?

  • Functional areas probably include the left angular gyrus, left inferior frontal cortex, and temporal regions anterior to the VWFA.

    “Although the precise projections from VWFA to systems involved in lexical, semantic and phonological processes are currently less clearly defined, functional areas probably include the left angular gyrus [52], left inferior frontal cortex [53], and temporal regions anterior to the VWFA [54].”

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: 4

  1. Broca, P. (1861). Remarques sur le sie `ge de la faculte ´du lan- gage articule ´suivie d' une observation d'aphe ´mie. Bulletin de la Socie ´te ´Anatomique de Paris, 6, 330-357.
  2. Caplan, D. (1992). Language. Structure, processings and dis- orders. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  3. De ´monet, J. F., Price, C. J., Wise, R., & Frackowiak, R. S. J. (1994). Differential activation of right and left posterior sylvian regions by semantic and phonological tasks: A po- sitron emission tomography study. Neuroscience Letters, 182, 25-28.
  4. Price, C. J., Warburton, E. A., Moore, C. J., Frackowiak, R. S. J., & Friston, K. J. (2001). Dynamic diaschisis: Context sensitive human brain lesions. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13, 419-429.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Giraud, A. L., & Price, C. J.
Affiliations
UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology (GB)
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Publisher
MIT Press
Published
2001-08
Volume
13
Issue
6
Pages
754-765
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2027486738
Cited by
163
References
57
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2012: 8
FWCI
6.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (051067)
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 › Phonetics and Phonology Research
Keywords
auditory word processing, superior temporal sulcus, superior temporal gyrus, phonological processing, semantic processing, lexical processing, speech perception, environmental sounds, inferior temporal cortex
MeSH terms
Adult, Auditory Cortex, Female, Humans, Male, Noise, Phonetics, Speech Perception, 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