Cited by 59Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismPhonetics and Phonology ResearchNeuroscience and Music Perception

Discriminating between auditory and motor cortical responses to speech and nonspeech mouth sounds

Open access
Agnew, Zarinah K., McGettigan, Carolyn, Scott, Sophie K.·2011·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

Several perspectives on speech perception posit a central role for the representation of articulations in speech comprehension, supported by evidence for premotor activation when participants listen to speech. However, no experiments have directly tested whether motor responses mirror the profile of selective auditory cortical responses to native speech sounds or whether motor and auditory areas respond in different ways to sounds. We used fMRI to investigate cortical responses to speech and nonspeech mouth (ingressive click) sounds. Speech sounds activated bilateral superior temporal gyri more than other sounds, a profile not seen in motor and premotor cortices. These results suggest that there are qualitative differences in the ways that temporal and motor areas are activated by speech and click sounds: Anterior temporal lobe areas are sensitive to the acoustic or phonetic properties, whereas motor responses may show more generalized responses to the acoustic stimuli.

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/jocn_a_00106

Cites

55 of 55 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?

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

Authors
Agnew, Z. K., McGettigan, C., & Scott, S. K.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Scott, Sophie K.
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Published
2011-12-01
Volume
23
Issue
12
Pages
4038-4047
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2083130322
Cited by
59
References
55
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 35 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (090961)
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
speech perception, auditory cortex, motor cortex, premotor cortex, superior temporal gyrus, anterior temporal lobe, phonetic properties
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Adult, Auditory Cortex, Auditory Perception, Brain Mapping, Discrimination Learning, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Motor Cortex, Speech Perception

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