Cited by 191Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismReading and Literacy DevelopmentNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

The neural substrate for concrete, abstract, and emotional word lexica: a positron emission tomography study

Beauregard, Mario, Chertkow, H., Bub, D., Murtha, S., Dixon, R., Evans, A.·1997·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

Viewing of single words produces a cognitively complex mental state in which anticipation, emotional responses, visual perceptual analysis, and activation of orthographic representations are all occurring. Previous PET studies have produced conflicting results, perhaps due to the conflation of these separate processes or the presence of subtle differences in stimulus material and methodology. A PET study of 10 normal individuals was carried out using the bolus H2(15)O intravenous injection technique to examine components of processing of passively viewed words. Subjects viewed blocks of random-letter strings or abstract, concrete, or emotional words (words with positive or negative emotional salience). Baseline conditions were either passive viewing of plus signs or an anticipatory state (viewing plus signs after being warned to expect words or random letters to appear imminently). All words (and to a lesser extent the random letters) produced robust activation of cerebral blood flow in the left posterior temporal lobe, in addition to bilateral occipital activation. Furthermore, emotional words produced activation in orbital and midline frontal structures. Further activation in the left orbital frontal gyrus, the left inferior temporal gyrus, the left caudate nucleus, the anterior cingulate, and the cerebellum could be ascribed to the anticipatory state. This pattern of activity suggests that the occipital regions are recruited for visual-perceptual analysis of words, and the left temporal lobe represents the neural substrate for the orthographic lexicon. In addition, emotionally relevant material produces further processing in limbic brain structures of the frontal lobes. Detailed analysis of the task therefore substantially clarifies the neuroanatomic basis of single-word processing.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/jocn.1997.9.4.441

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • The VWFA is generally insensitive to factors that influence lexical access, such as contrasts between high- and low-frequency words, or between real and pseudowords.

    “TheVWFAisgenerallyinsensitive to factors that influence lexical access, such as contrasts between high- and lowfrequency words [24], or between real and pseudowords, as revealed by event-related fMRI analyses [11,23,25].”
  • Activation in the left fusiform gyrus during reading can be identified merely by contrasting word reading relative to rest, either with PET or with fMRI.

    “Activation in this region can be identified merely by contrasting word reading relative to rest, either with PET or with fMRI (Beauregard et al., 1997; Brunswick et al., 1999; Dehaene et al., 2002; Fiez et al., 1999; Paulesu et al., 2000; Wagner et al., 1998).”

    From Specialization within the ventral stream: the case for the visual word form area (2004) · cites this paper as Beauregard et al., 1997

  • A large number of studies, using various methods, have evidenced a reproducible activation of the left fusiform gyrus during reading.

    “A large number of studies, using various methods, have evidenced a reproducible activation of the left fusiform gyrus during reading.”

    From Specialization within the ventral stream: the case for the visual word form area (2004) · cites this paper as Beauregard et al., 1997

  • The VWFA responds more to words or to pseudo-words than to random consonant strings that violate orthographic constraints.

    “Second, the VWFA responds more to words or to pseudo-words than to random consonant strings that violate orthographic constraints (Beauregard et al., 1997; Bu ¨chel et al., 1998; Cohen et al., 2002; Price et al., 1996; Rees et al., 1999; Xu et al., 2001).”

    From Specialization within the ventral stream: the case for the visual word form area (2004) · cites this paper as Beauregard et al., 1997

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 53 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Beauregard, M., Chertkow, H., Bub, D., Murtha, S., Dixon, R., & Evans, A.
Affiliations
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
  • Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research (CA)
  • University of Victoria and Centre Hospitalier Côtedes-Neiges, Montreal
  • McGill University (CA)
  • Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital (CA)
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Published
1997-07-01
Volume
9
Issue
4
Pages
441-461
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W1998440136
Cited by
191
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
6.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
word processing, concrete words, abstract words, emotional words, orthographic lexicon, visual word recognition, orbitofrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, caudate nucleus, cerebellum, limbic system, cerebral blood flow

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