Cited by 13Reading and Literacy DevelopmentNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismVisual perception and processing mechanisms

An investigation of twenty/20 vision in reading

Open access
Hellyer, Peter J., Woodhead, Zoé V. J., Leech, Robert, Wise, Richard J. S.·2011·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

One functional anatomical model of reading, drawing on human neuropsychological and neuroimaging data, proposes that a region in left ventral occipitotemporal cortex (vOT) becomes, through experience, specialized for written word perception. We tested this hypothesis by presenting numbers in orthographical and digital form with two task demands, phonological and numerical. We observed a main effect of task on left vOT activity but not stimulus type, with increased activity during the phonological task that was also associated with increased activity in the left inferior frontal gyrus, a region implicated in speech production. Region-of-interest analysis confirmed that there was equal activity for orthographical and digital written forms in the left vOT during the phonological task, despite greater visual complexity of the orthographical forms. This evidence is incompatible with a predominantly feedforward model of written word recognition that proposes that the left vOT is a specialized cortical module for word recognition in literate subjects. Rather, the physiological data presented here fits better with interactive computational models of reading that propose that written word recognition emerges from bidirectional interactions between three processes: visual, phonological, and semantic. Further, the present study is in accord with others that indicate that the left vOT is a route through which nonlinguistic stimuli, perhaps high contrast two-dimensional objects in particular, gain access to a predominantly left-lateralized language and semantic system.

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.2740-11.2011

Cites

54 of 54 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 left ventral occipitotemporal cortex contributes to written word recognition by integrating bottom-up generic visual processing with top-down influences from phonological and semantic areas.

    “A complementary perspective is that the left ventral occipitotemporal cortex contributes to written word recognition by integrating bottom up (feed forward) generic visual processing with top-down influences from phonological, and semantic areas (Cai et al., 2010; Hellyer et al., 2011; Price and Devlin, 2011; Wang et al., 2011; Woodhead et al., 2011a).”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hellyer, P. J., Woodhead, Z. V. J., Leech, R., & Wise, R. J. S.
Affiliations
Hammersmith Hospital (GB)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2011-10-12
Volume
31
Issue
41
Pages
14631-14638
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2118620300
Cited by
13
References
54
Citations by year
2021: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 5
FWCI
5.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Research Councils UK
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
reading, visual word recognition, phonological processing, number processing, inferior frontal gyrus
MeSH terms
Carbamide Peroxide, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Brain Mapping, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Language, Functional Laterality, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Peroxides, Photic Stimulation, Reaction Time, Reading, Urea, Vision, Ocular, Visual Cortex, Vocabulary

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