The DOI matches its Crossref record; 96 of the 96 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Executive Semantic Processing Is Underpinned by a Large-scale Neural Network: Revealing the Contribution of Left Prefrontal, Posterior Temporal, and Parietal Cortex to Controlled Retrieval and Selection Using TMS
Open accessAbstract
To understand the meanings of words and objects, we need to have knowledge about these items themselves plus executive mechanisms that compute and manipulate semantic information in a task-appropriate way. The neural basis for semantic control remains controversial. Neuroimaging studies have focused on the role of the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG), whereas neuropsychological research suggests that damage to a widely distributed network elicits impairments of semantic control. There is also debate about the relationship between semantic and executive control more widely. We used TMS in healthy human volunteers to create “virtual lesions” in structures typically damaged in patients with semantic control deficits: LIFG, left posterior middle temporal gyrus (pMTG), and intraparietal sulcus (IPS). The influence of TMS on tasks varying in semantic and nonsemantic control demands was examined for each region within this hypothesized network to gain insights into (i) their functional specialization (i.e., involvement in semantic representation, controlled retrieval, or selection) and (ii) their domain dependence (i.e., semantic or cognitive control). The results revealed that LIFG and pMTG jointly support both the controlled retrieval and selection of semantic knowledge. IPS specifically participates in semantic selection and responds to manipulations of nonsemantic control demands. These observations are consistent with a large-scale semantic control network, as predicted by lesion data, that draws on semantic-specific (LIFG and pMTG) and domain-independent executive components (IPS).
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing.
Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.82.6.407 · Cited by 8,141
(1967) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 7,532
Rossi, S., Hallett, M., Rossini, P. M., & Pascual-Leone, A. (2009) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2009.08.016 · Cited by 5,367
Binder, J. R., Desai, R. H., Graves, W. W., & Conant, L. L. (2009) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp055 · Cited by 4,060
Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception
Navon, D. (1977) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(77)90012-3 · Cited by 4,005
Where do you know what you know? The representation of semantic knowledge in the human brain
Patterson, K., Nestor, P. J., & Rogers, T. T. (2007) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2277 · Cited by 2,706
Common regions of the human frontal lobe recruited by diverse cognitive demands
Duncan, J., & Owen, A. M. (2000) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/s0166-2236(00)01633-7 · Cited by 2,498
Wassermann, E. M. (1998) · Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section · doi:10.1016/s0168-5597(97)00096-8 · Cited by 2,293
Hickok, G., & Poeppel, D. (2004) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.011 · Cited by 2,212
The spatial and temporal signatures of word production components
Indefrey, P., & Levelt, W. J. M. (2004) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2002.06.001 · Cited by 2,144
Cited by
The neural and computational bases of semantic cognition
Ralph, M. A. L., Jefferies, E., Patterson, K., & Rogers, T. T. (2017) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn.2016.150 · Cited by 1,864
Self-citationJefferies, E. (2013) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2012.10.008 · Cited by 555
Self-citationNoonan, K. A., Jefferies, E., Visser, M., & Lambon Ralph, M. A. (2013) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00442 · Cited by 543
Self-citationKrieger-Redwood, K., Jefferies, E., Karapanagiotidis, T., Seymour, R., Nunes, A., Ang, J. W. A., Majernikova, V., Mollo, G., & Smallwood, J. (2016) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.07.060 · Cited by 106
Self-citationBinney, R. J., & Ramsey, R. (2020) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.01.030 · Cited by 113
Metadata
- Authors
- Whitney, C., Kirk, M., O'Sullivan, J., Lambon Ralph, M. A., & Jefferies, E.
- Venue
- Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 2012-01-01
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 133-147
- ISSN
- 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
- 1530-8898
- OpenAlex
- W2014585954
- Cited by
- 261
- References
- 96
- FWCI
- 6.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Executive Semantic Processing Is Underpinned by a Large-scale Neural Network: Revealing the Contribution of Left Prefrontal, Posterior Temporal, and Parietal Cortex to Controlled Retrieval and Selection Using TMS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/jocn_a_00123
- The paper
- Whitney, C., Kirk, M., O'Sullivan, J., Lambon Ralph, M. A., & Jefferies, E. (2012). Executive Semantic Processing Is Underpinned by a Large-scale Neural Network: Revealing the Contribution of Left Prefrontal, Posterior Temporal, and Parietal Cortex to Controlled Retrieval and Selection Using TMS. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00123
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.