Cited by 1,424Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismHemispheric Asymmetry in NeuroscienceReading and Literacy Development

Human Brain Language Areas Identified by Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Open access
Binder, Jeffrey R., Frost, Julie A., Hammeke, Thomas A., Cox, Robert W., Rao, Stephen M., Prieto, Thomas·1997·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI) was used to identify candidate language processing areas in the intact human brain. Language was defined broadly to include both phonological and lexical–semantic functions and to exclude sensory, motor, and general executive functions. The language activation task required phonetic and semantic analysis of aurally presented words and was compared with a control task involving perceptual analysis of nonlinguistic sounds. Functional maps of the entire brain were obtained from 30 right-handed subjects. These maps were averaged in standard stereotaxic space to produce a robust “average activation map” that proved reliable in a split-half analysis. As predicted from classical models of language organization based on lesion data, cortical activation associated with language processing was strongly lateralized to the left cerebral hemisphere and involved a network of regions in the frontal, temporal, and parietal lobes. Less consistent with classical models were (1) the existence of left hemisphere temporoparietal language areas outside the traditional “Wernicke area,” namely, in the middle temporal, inferior temporal, fusiform, and angular gyri; (2) extensive left prefrontal language areas outside the classical “Broca area”; and (3) clear participation of these left frontal areas in a task emphasizing “receptive” language functions. Although partly in conflict with the classical model of language localization, these findings are generally compatible with reported lesion data and provide additional support for ongoing efforts to refine and extend the classical model.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.17-01-00353.1997

Cites

101 of 101 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 language localizer was previously shown to robustly and reliably identify each of the key brain regions previously implicated in high-level linguistic processing in at least 80% of subjects individually.

    “This localizer was previously shown (29) to robustly and reliably identify each of the key brain regions previously implicated in high-level linguistic processing (30, 31) (Fig. 2 and Fig. S1) in at least 80% of subjects individually”

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: 3

  1. Damasio H (1989) Neuroimaging contributions to the understanding of aphasia. In: Handbook of neuropsychology (Boller F, Grafman J, eds), pp 3-46. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
  2. Mayeux R, Kandel ER (1985) Natural language, disorders of language, and other localizable disorders of cognitive function. In: Principles of neural science (Kandel ER, Schwartz J, eds), pp 688 -703. New York: Elsevier.
  3. Toga AW, Jones AS, Rothfield JM, Woods RP, Payne BA, Huang C, Mazziotta JC, Cai R (1993) Anatomic variability as measured with a 3D reconstructed Talairach atlas. In: Quantification of brain function (Uemura K, Lassen NA, Jones T, Kanno I, eds), pp 449 -456. New York: Elsevier.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Binder, J. R., Frost, J. A., Hammeke, T. A., Cox, R. W., Rao, S. M., & Prieto, T.
Affiliations
  • Pediatrics and Genetics (US)
  • Medical College of Wisconsin (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
1997-01-01
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
353-362
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2104127342
Cited by
1,424
References
101
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 98 · 2016: 68 · 2015: 52 · 2014: 52 · 2013: 69 · 2012: 65
FWCI
28.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P01MH51358, P01MH051358)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS033576, R01 NS33576)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hemispheric Asymmetry in Neuroscience
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
language localization, language processing, phonological processing, lexical-semantic processing, left hemisphere lateralization, Wernicke's area, Broca's area, fusiform gyrus, angular gyrus, receptive language, auditory word processing, functional maps
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Auditory Perception, Brain, Brain Mapping, Female, Humans, Functional Laterality, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, 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