Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 255

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 81 of the 81 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparing the Effects of Auditory Deprivation and Sign Language within the Auditory and Visual Cortex

Fine, Ione, Finney, Eva M., Boynton, Geoffrey M., Dobkins, Karen R.·2005·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

To investigate neural plasticity resulting from early auditory deprivation and use of American Sign Language, we measured responses to visual stimuli in deaf signers, hearing signers, and hearing nonsigners using functional magnetic resonance imaging. We examined “compensatory hypertrophy” (changes in the responsivity/size of visual cortical areas) and “cross-modal plasticity” (changes in auditory cortex responses to visual stimuli). We measured the volume of early visual areas (V1, V2, V3, V4, and MT+). We also measured the amplitude of responses within these areas, and within the auditory cortex, to a peripheral visual motion stimulus that was attended or ignored. We found no major differences between deaf and hearing subjects in the size or responsivity of early visual areas. In contrast, within the auditory cortex, motion stimuli evoked significant responses in deaf subjects, but not in hearing subjects, in a region of the right auditory cortex corresponding to Brodmann's areas 41, 42, and 22. This hemispheric selectivity may be due to a predisposition for the right auditory cortex to process motion; earlier studies report a right hemisphere bias for auditory motion in hearing subjects. Visual responses within the auditory cortex of deaf subjects were stronger for attended than ignored stimuli, suggesting top-down processes. Hearing signers did not show visual responses in the auditory cortex, indicating that cross-modal plasticity can be attributed to auditory deprivation rather than sign language experience. The largest effects of auditory deprivation occurred within the auditory cortex rather than the visual cortex, suggesting that the absence of normal input is necessary for large-scale cortical reorganization to occur.

Overview

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 · 10.1162/089892905774597173

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 81 references

Cited by

See all 255

Metadata

Authors
Fine, I., Finney, E. M., Boynton, G. M., & Dobkins, K. R.
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Published
2005-10-01
Volume
17
Issue
10
Pages
1621-1637
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2109015013
Cited by
255
References
81
FWCI
3.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparing the Effects of Auditory Deprivation and Sign Language within the Auditory and Visual Cortex. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/089892905774597173
The paper
Fine, I., Finney, E. M., Boynton, G. M., & Dobkins, K. R. (2005). Comparing the Effects of Auditory Deprivation and Sign Language within the Auditory and Visual Cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892905774597173

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.