Cited by 56Hemispheric Asymmetry in NeuroscienceNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismPhonetics and Phonology Research

An application of univariate and multivariate approaches in fMRI to quantifying the hemispheric lateralization of acoustic and linguistic processes

Open access
McGettigan, Carolyn, Evans, Samuel, Rosen, Stuart, Agnew, Zarinah K., Shah, Poonam, Scott, Sophie K.·2012·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

The question of hemispheric lateralization of neural processes is one that is pertinent to a range of subdisciplines of cognitive neuroscience. Language is often assumed to be left-lateralized in the human brain, but there has been a long running debate about the underlying reasons for this. We addressed this problem with fMRI by identifying the neural responses to amplitude and spectral modulations in speech and how these interact with speech intelligibility to test previous claims for hemispheric asymmetries in acoustic and linguistic processes in speech perception. We used both univariate and multivariate analyses of the data, which enabled us to both identify the networks involved in processing these acoustic and linguistic factors and to test the significance of any apparent hemispheric asymmetries. We demonstrate bilateral activation of superior temporal cortex in response to speech-derived acoustic modulations in the absence of intelligibility. However, in a contrast of amplitude-modulated and spectrally modulated conditions that differed only in their intelligibility (where one was partially intelligible and the other unintelligible), we show a left dominant pattern of activation in STS, inferior frontal cortex, and insula. Crucially, multivariate pattern analysis showed that there were significant differences between the left and the right hemispheres only in the processing of intelligible speech. This result shows that the left hemisphere dominance in linguistic processing does not arise because of low-level, speech-derived acoustic factors and that multivariate pattern analysis provides a method for unbiased testing of hemispheric asymmetries in processing.

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_00161

Cites

63 of 63 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?

  • The general response to intelligibility-and general effects of training with SWS-involved regions consistent with previous research on distorted speech.

    “Notwithstanding the small sample size of the present study, it is also important to note that the general response to intelligibility-and general effects of training with SWS-involved regions consistent with previous research on distorted speech.”
  • Neither group performed at ceiling on the post-scan task: keyword accuracy after scanning was reasonably low in both groups compared to prior studies using distorted speech, despite the fact that speech/non-speech discrimination was good.

    “However, neither group performed at ceiling on the post-scan task: keyword accuracy after scanning was reasonably low in both groups compared to prior studies using distorted speech (McGettigan et al., 2012), despite the fact that speech/ non-speech discrimination was good.”
  • The primarily left-lateralized network seen across both groups is consistent with intelligibility effects using very similar stimuli, as is the involvement of the SMA.

    “The primarily left-lateralized network seen across both groups is consistent with intelligibility effects using very similar stimuli (McGettigan et al., 2012), as is the involvement of the SMA (Rosen et al., 2011).”

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: 1

  1. Rosen S Wise RJS Chadha S Scott SK Sense, nonsense and modulations: The left hemisphere dominance for speech perception is not based on sensitivity to specific acoustic features PloS ONE (under review)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McGettigan, C., Evans, S., Rosen, S., Agnew, Z. K., Shah, P., & Scott, S. K.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Published
2012-03-01
Volume
24
Issue
3
Pages
636-652
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2152952454
Cited by
56
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (090961, WT074414MA)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hemispheric Asymmetry in Neuroscience
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
Keywords
hemispheric lateralization, speech perception, speech intelligibility, amplitude modulation, spectral modulation, superior temporal sulcus, inferior frontal cortex, insula, left hemisphere dominance, multivariate pattern analysis
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Brain, Brain Mapping, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Functional Laterality, Linguistics, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Oxygen, Reaction Time, Speech Perception, Young Adult

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