The DOI matches its Crossref record; 121 of the 126 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 2 are not checked yet.
The Spatial and Temporal Signatures of Word Production Components: A Critical Update
Open accessAbstract
In the first decade of neurocognitive word production research the predominant approach was brain mapping, i.e., investigating the regional cerebral brain activation patterns correlated with word production tasks, such as picture naming and word generation. Indefrey and Levelt (2004) conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis of word production studies that used this approach and combined the resulting spatial information on neural correlates of component processes of word production with information on the time course of word production provided by behavioral and electromagnetic studies. In recent years, neurocognitive word production research has seen a major change toward a hypothesis-testing approach. This approach is characterized by the design of experimental variables modulating single component processes of word production and testing for predicted effects on spatial or temporal neurocognitive signatures of these components. This change was accompanied by the development of a broader spectrum of measurement and analysis techniques. The article reviews the findings of recent studies using the new approach. The time course assumptions of Indefrey and Levelt (2004) have largely been confirmed requiring only minor adaptations. Adaptations of the brain structure/function relationships proposed by Indefrey and Levelt (2004) include the precise role of subregions of the left inferior frontal gyrus as well as a probable, yet to date unclear role of the inferior parietal cortex in word production.
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.
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 source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“in lab experiments participants typically need 600 ms to 800 ms to name a line drawing of a common object”
From Timing in Conversation (2023) · cites this paper as Indefrey, 2011
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This is remarkable because utterance planning is not instantaneous but requires substantial amounts of time.”
From Timing in Conversation (2023) · cites this paper as Indefrey, 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.
Citations
Cites
Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain
Talairach, J., & Tournoux, P. (1988) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,798
Co-planar stereotaxic atlas of the human brain
Laitinen, L. (1989) · Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery · doi:10.1016/0303-8467(89)90128-5 · Cited by 7,565
The cortical organization of speech processing
Hickok, G., & Poeppel, D. (2007) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2113 · Cited by 5,495 · cited 3×
“Secondly, the influential dualstream model of speech processing (Hickok and Poeppel, 2000, 2004, 2007) assumes an area at the boundary between temporal and parietal lobes (area Spt) to function as a sensorimotor interface in language production.”
BackgroundMethodA theory of lexical access in speech production
Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x99001776 · Cited by 5,295 · cited 5×
“Levelt et al. (1999) assume this selection process to take place in a part of the mental lexicon (lemma level) that is linked to the conceptual level and contains information about the grammatical properties of words, such as word class or grammatical gender.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialDRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud.
Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.108.1.204 · Cited by 4,500
Binder, J. R., Desai, R. H., Graves, W. W., & Conant, L. L. (2009) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp055 · Cited by 4,060 · cited 4×
“…prefrontal cortex, IFG, ventromedial prefrontal cortex, and posterior cingulate gyrus) identified in a recent comprehensive meta-analysis by Binder et al., 2009, see also Schwartz et al., 2009, for an excellent discussion of the clinical evidence on regions involved in conceptual…”
BackgroundResultInfluentialSpeaking. From Intention to Articulation
Caplan, D. N. (1990) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/0166-2236(90)90151-y · Cited by 4,036
Speed of processing in the human visual system
Thorpe, S., Fize, D., & Marlot, C. (1996) · Nature · doi:10.1038/381520a0 · Cited by 3,538
A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production.
Dell, G. S. (1986) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037//0033-295x.93.3.283 · Cited by 3,236 · cited 3×
“With respect to the insula, this pattern of reports is better compatible with a role in articulatory planning as suggested by Dronkers (1996) than a role in articulatory execution.”
BackgroundHickok, G., & Poeppel, D. (2004) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.011 · Cited by 2,212 · cited 4×
“, 1996; Hirano et al., 1997). An involvement of the bilateral STG in the internal loop of self-monitoring is suggested by data from Shergill et al. (2002) who manipulated the rate of inner speech. More recently, Tourville et al. (2008) used feedback with a shifted first formant frequency and applied SEM to the resulti…”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Turn-taking in Human Communication – Origins and Implications for Language Processing
Levinson, S. C. (2015) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2015.10.010 · Cited by 820
“Moreover, the language production system is notoriously slow – preparation before output begins takes 600 ms for a single word if primed [7,8], approximately 1000 ms if not [9], and around 1500 ms for a short clause [10].”
Redefining the role of Broca’s area in speech
Flinker, A., Korzeniewska, A., Shestyuk, A. Y., Franaszczuk, P. J., Dronkers, N. F., Knight, R. T., & Crone, N. E. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1414491112 · Cited by 487
“Indefrey and Levelt viewed Broca’s area as critically involved in phonological processing whereas subsequent articulatory encoding is supported by motor cortices (4, 7).”
BackgroundPredicting while comprehending language: A theory and review.
Pickering, M. J., & Gambi, C. (2018) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000158 · Cited by 581
Timing in turn-taking and its implications for processing models of language
Levinson, S. C., & Torreira, F. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00731 · Cited by 686
“…serial, and proceeds through conceptualization, lemma retrieval, phonological retrieval, and phonetic encoding, following a time course that seems well understood (Indefrey, 2011), extending 600–1200 ms or more before articulation depending on the ease of retrieval and the length of the turn.”
BackgroundCoupled neural systems underlie the production and comprehension of naturalistic narrative speech
Silbert, L. J., Honey, C. J., Simony, E., Poeppel, D., & Hasson, U. (2014) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1323812111 · Cited by 352
“In addition, analytical methods differ greatly between this study and previous ones: Here we measure response reliability, whereas the majority of previous studies measure signal amplitude using eventrelated averaging methods (12, 23).”
MethodResultThe Cortical Organization of Syntax
Matchin, W., & Hickok, G. (2020) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhz180 · Cited by 370
Towards a New Neurobiology of Language
Poeppel, D., Emmorey, K. D., Hickok, G. S., & Liina Pylkkänen, A. (2012) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3244-12.2012 · Cited by 315
“Second, the definition of and restriction to the few brain regions comprising the classical model dramatically underestimates the number and distribution of brain regions now known to play a critical role in language comprehension (Price, 2012) and production (Indefrey, 2011).”
BackgroundSkipper, J. I., Devlin, J. T., & Lametti, D. R. (2016) · Brain and Language · doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2016.10.004 · Cited by 240
“In both label-based (Indefrey, 2011; Indefrey & Levelt, 2000, 2004; see also Munding, Dubarry, & Alario, 2016) and activation likelihood estimation (ALE) neuroimaging meta-analyses (Brown, Ingham, Ingham, Laird, & Fox, 2005; Eickhoff, Heim, Zilles, & Amunts, 2009; Turkeltaub, Eden, Jones, &…”
Listeners use intonational phrase boundaries to project turn ends in spoken interaction
Bögels, S., & Torreira, F. (2015) · Journal of Phonetics · doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2015.04.004 · Cited by 211
“, 2006; Levinson, 2013), since listeners will often need several hundreds of milliseconds to plan the initial words of their turn (Indefrey & Levelt, 2004; Indefrey, 2011). Under this hypothesis, listeners would need to rely on information located earlier in the speaker's turn. We address this issue in the following s…”
InfluentialInteraction between dorsal and ventral processing streams: Where, when and how?
Cloutman, L. L. (2012) · Brain and Language · doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2012.08.003 · Cited by 225
“…& Gagnon, 1997; Levelt, Roelofs, & Meyer, 1999; Schwartz, Dell, Martin, Gahl, & Sobel, 2006), with current neurolinguistic models attempting to map these previously defined linguistic concepts onto cortical networks (e.g., Hickok & Poeppel, 2004, 2007; Indefrey, 2011; Indefrey & Levelt, 2004).”
BackgroundHarvey, D. Y., & Schnur, T. T. (2015) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2015.03.004 · Cited by 173
“In a meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies on word production, Indefrey and Levelt (2004; see also Indefrey, 2011) identified the mid- to posterior middle temporal gyrus (MTG) as important for semantically driven lexical retrieval, suggesting a posterior temporal lobe (including the mid-posterior…”
BackgroundMethodRoelofs, A. (2017) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2017.12.007 · Cited by 162
The cortical dynamics of speaking: present shortcomings and future avenues
Strijkers, K., & Costa, A. (2016) · Language Cognition and Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/23273798.2015.1120878 · Cited by 163
“…et al., 2012) and activation maxima slowly progressing from posterior towards anterior brain regions are frequently reported in response to object naming (e.g. Hulten et al., 2009; Indefrey, 2011; I&L, 2004; Liljestrom et al., 2009; Salmelin et al., 1994; Soros et al., 2003; Vihla et al., 2006).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialCorreia, J., Jansma, B. M., Hausfeld, L. G., Kikkert, S., & Bonte, M. L. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00071 · Cited by 157
“…(Marinkovic et al., 2003) corresponding to the www.frontiersin.org February 2015 | Volume 6 | Article 71 | 1 network of brain areas observed in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies of speech processing (Binder et al., 2000; Hickok and Poeppel, 2007; Rauschecker and Scott, 2009).”
BackgroundWalenski, M., Europa, E., Caplan, D. N., & Thompson, C. K. (2019) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.24523 · Cited by 159
“, the AG and SMG) also is associated with sentence level semantic representations and sentence comprehension (Indefrey, 2011; Indefrey & Levelt, 2004; Schönberger et al., 2014; Vigneau et al., 2006); though note that our analyses revealed no activation peaks in the SMG for sentence comprehension.”
ResultNarrative discourse in anomic aphasia
Andreetta, S., Cantagallo, A., & Marini, A. (2012) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.04.003 · Cited by 147
“Some of the most influental models of linguistic production (e.g., Frederiksen, Bracewell, Breuleux, & Renaud, 1990; Indefrey, 2011) postulate that the process of lexical generation relies on three major stages: (1) a pre-linguistic conceptual phase, where the speaker generates a mental plan of…”
BackgroundMiozzo, M., Friedemann Pulvermüller, A., & Hauk, O. (2014) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhu137 · Cited by 153
“Keywords: language production, lexical access, MEG”
BackgroundPickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108610728 · Cited by 163
A Thalamocortical Mechanism for the Absence of Overt Motor Behavior in Covertly Aware Patients
Fernández‐Espejo, D., Rossit, S., & Owen, A. M. (2015) · JAMA Neurology · doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2015.2614 · Cited by 124
The Frontal Aslant Tract: A Systematic Review for Neurosurgical Applications
Corte, E. L., Eldahaby, D., Greco, E., Aquino, D., Bertolini, G., Levi, V., Ottenhausen, M., Demichelis, G., Romito, L. M., Acerbi, F., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Neurology · doi:10.3389/fneur.2021.641586 · Cited by 129
Gauvin, H. S., Baene, W. D., Braß, M., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2015) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.11.037 · Cited by 124
“…detection in internal speech to take place through speech perception processes (Hartsuiker & Kolk, 2001; Levelt, 1983, 1989; Indefrey and Levelt, 2004; Indefrey 2011; Hickok 2012), but rather supports a conflict monitoring model of error detection in speech, as proposed by Nozari et al. (2011).”
InfluentialUnaddressed participants’ gaze in multi-person interaction: optimizing recipiency
Holler, J., & Kendrick, K. H. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00098 · Cited by 125
“As Levinson (2013) has argued, short gaps between turns do not provide adequate time to prepare even a simple next turn, which psycholinguistic research has shown requires at least 600 ms (Indefrey and Levelt, 2004; Indefrey, 2011).”
BackgroundIlle, S., Sollmann, N., Hauck, T., Maurer, S., Tanigawa, N., Obermueller, T., Negwer, C., Droese, D., Zimmer, C., Meyer, B., et al. (2015) · Journal of neurosurgery · doi:10.3171/2014.9.jns14929 · Cited by 116
Differential processing of thematic and categorical conceptual relations in spoken word production.
de Zubicaray, G. I., Hansen, S. J., & McMahon, K. L. (2012) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/a0028717 · Cited by 116
The Potential for a Speech Brain–Computer Interface Using Chronic Electrocorticography
Rabbani, Q., Milsap, G., & Crone, N. E. (2019) · Neurotherapeutics · doi:10.1007/s13311-018-00692-2 · Cited by 112
“1 Stages of speech production according to Indefrey’s [3] model.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialLu, J., Zhao, Z., Zhang, J., Wu, B., Zhu, Y., Chang, E. F., Wu, J., Duffau, H., & Berger, M. S. (2021) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awab125 · Cited by 114
“25,26 However, a recent study found stimulating some speech arrest sites in vPrCG also elicited the arrest of ongoing manual movements (negative motor responses).”
Krieg, S. M., Tarapore, P. E., Picht, T., Tanigawa, N., Houde, J. F., Sollmann, N., Meyer, B., Vajkoczy, P., Berger, M. S., Ringel, F. A., et al. (2014) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.06.016 · Cited by 110
“…in these areas was between 0 and 800 ms (Acheson et al., 2011; Hulten et al., 2009; Salmelin et al., 1994; Soros et al., 2003; Vihla et al., 2006) with a median value of 190 ms for mMTG, 320 ms for pSTG, 360 ms for pMTG, 371 ms for mSTG, 280 ms for SMG, and 300 ms for anG (Indefrey, 2011).”
InfluentialPiai, V., Roelofs, A., Jensen, O. B., Schoffelen, J., & Bonnefond, M. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0088674 · Cited by 111
“However, according to time estimates from meta-analyses [37,38], picture name planning reaches the articulatory buffer no earlier than about 145 ms before articulation onset.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialStrijkers, K., & Costa, A. (2011) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00356 · Cited by 106
“However, this is not the case, since Indefrey (2011) does rely on studies which solely manipulate one and arguably more ambiguous variables (e.g., SI in Aristei et al., 2011; name agreement in Cheng et al., 2010; etc.) as independent sources of evidence concerning time course. www.frontiersin.org…”
BackgroundFunctional Language Shift to the Right Hemisphere in Patients with Language-Eloquent Brain Tumors
Krieg, S. M., Sollmann, N., Hauck, T., Ille, S., Förschler, A., Meyer, B., & Ringel, F. A. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0075403 · Cited by 110
“This differentiation is useful for separating the motor part of language from conceptual, phonological, and semantic processing of language [39].”
BackgroundInfluentialPiai, V., Roelofs, A., Acheson, D. J., & Takashima, A. (2013) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00832 · Cited by 113
“…the neural substrates associated with the processes of regulating and monitoring language production have remained relatively underspecified (cf. Indefrey, 2011; for recent advances, see Nozari et al., 2011; Riès et al., 2011), in part because the manipulations and comparisons within these…”
BackgroundInfluentialFunctional MRI evidence for the decline of word retrieval and generation during normal aging
Baciu, M., Boudiaf, N., Cousin, É., Perrone‐Bertolotti, M., Pichat, C., Fournet, N., Chainay, H., Lamalle, L., & Krainik, A. (2015) · AGE · doi:10.1007/s11357-015-9857-y · Cited by 113
“…the psycholinguistic models of lexical production (Caramazza 1997; Dell and O’Seaghdha 1992; Levelt 1992) consider three main stages of word retrieval and generation, i.e., conceptual (lexical), meaning (lexical retrieval, semantic), and phonological–phonetic (for details, see Indefrey 2011).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialNeurolinguistics Research Advancing Development of a Direct-Speech Brain-Computer Interface
Cooney, C., Folli, R., & Coyle, D. (2018) · iScience · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2018.09.016 · Cited by 111
“EEG studies have been used to study the time courses associated with the processing stages in word production (see Indefrey, 2011 for review).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialOn the cortical dynamics of word production: a review of the MEG evidence
Munding, D., Dubarry, A., & Alario, F. ‐. (2015) · Language Cognition and Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/23273798.2015.1071857 · Cited by 108
“Dynamics of function – interpretation according to Indefrey’s attribution of functional anatomy Table S1 lists all areas mentioned as being responsible for a function in Indefrey and Levelt’s model of speech production (Indefrey, 2011; Indefrey & Levelt, 2004).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialA speech planning network for interactive language use
Castellucci, G. A., Kovach, C. K., Howard, M. A., Greenlee, J. D. W., & Long, M. A. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04270-z · Cited by 106
Beta oscillations reflect memory and motor aspects of spoken word production
Piai, V., Roelofs, A., Rommers, J., & Maris, E. (2015) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.22806 · Cited by 116
“However, the beta-power decrease in the naming task was more broadly distributed over the left temporal cortex, extending more anteriorly to temporal areas strongly associated with conceptualizing and lexical retrieval in word production [e.g., Baldo et al., 2013; Indefrey, 2011; Indefrey and Levelt, 2004; Lambon Ralp…”
BackgroundGrandchamp, R., Rapin, L., Perrone-Bertolotti, M., Pichat, C., Haldin, C., Cousin, E., Lachaux, J.-P., Dohen, M., Perrier, P., Garnier, M., et al. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02019 · Cited by 97
“This proposition was based on considerations and models by Indefrey (2011), Guenther and Vladusich (2012), Hickok (2012), and Tian and Poeppel (2013), among others.”
MethodFast response times signal social connection in conversation
Templeton, E. M., Chang, L. J., Reynolds, E. A., Cone LeBeaumont, M. D., & Wheatley, T. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2116915119 · Cited by 128
“The modal conversational response time is extremely short, around 200 ms (18, 19)—three times faster than the average speed with which people can name an object (20, 21) and too rapid to rely on deliberative conscious control (22).”
BackgroundA dorsal-pathway account of aphasic language production: The WEAVER++/ARC model
Roelofs, A. (2014) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2014.07.001 · Cited by 112
“…localizing the functional processes assumed by the psycholinguistic model (i.e., WEAVER þþ ) to anatomical gray-matter areas of the human brain (Indefrey, 2011a; Indefrey & Levelt, 2004); (3) tracto-graphic evidence concerning the structure and anatomical white-matter connections of the AF…”
BackgroundInfluentialThe roles of the temporal lobe in creative insight: an integrated review
Shen, W., Yuan, Y., Liu, C., & Luo, J. (2017) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2017.1308885 · Cited by 101
“Additionally, given that the aMTG region is sometimes implicated in effortful retrieval attempts (Han, O'Connor, Eslick, & Dobbins, 2012; Lind ın, D ıaz, Capilla, Ortiz, & Maest u, 2010), especially the retrieval and selection of more peripheral thematic relations (Indefrey, 2011; Taylor, Rastle, & Davis, 2013) and se…”
BackgroundNozari, N., & Pinet, S. (2019) · Journal of Neurolinguistics · doi:10.1016/j.jneuroling.2019.100875 · Cited by 96
“This assumed timeline is often borrowed from Indefrey and Levelt (2004) or its upgraded form (Indefrey, 2011).”
BackgroundIlle, S., Sollmann, N., Hauck, T., Maurer, S., Tanigawa, N., Obermueller, T., Negwer, C., Droese, D., Boeckh‐Behrens, T., Meyer, B., et al. (2015) · Journal of neurosurgery · doi:10.3171/2014.10.jns141582 · Cited by 94
Angrick, M., Luo, S., Rabbani, Q., Candrea, D. N., Shah, S., Milsap, G., Anderson, W. S., Gordon, C. R., Rosenblatt, K. R., Clawson, L., et al. (2024) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-60277-2 · Cited by 103
“The color bar at the bottom limits the temporal influence to − 400 ms prior to PSO, consistent with previous reports about speech planning 39 and articulatory representations 19 .”
BackgroundResultBilingualism and domain-general cognitive functions from a neural perspective: A systematic review
Tao, L., Wang, G., Zhu, M., & Cai, Q. (2021) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.02.029 · Cited by 105
AbdulSabur, N. Y., Xu, Y., Liu, S., Chow, H. M., Baxter, M., Carson, J., & Braun, A. R. (2014) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2014.01.017 · Cited by 99
“It is now known that the anatomical foundations of speech comprehension and production and their interrelation are more complex (Hickok & Poeppel, 2007; Indefrey, 2011).”
BackgroundMARINI, A., & Andreetta, S. (2016) · John Benjamins Publishing Company eBooks · doi:10.1075/z.200 · Cited by 97
Hofstetter, S., Friedmann, N., & Assaf, Y. (2016) · Brain Structure and Function · doi:10.1007/s00429-016-1273-2 · Cited by 88
“…are thought to involve various areas in the MTG and superior temporal gyrus (STG) (Damasio et al. 2004; Indefrey 2007; Dronkers et al. 2000; Indefrey 2011; Indefrey and Levelt 2004; Philipose et al. 2007; Hickok and Poeppel 2000; Indefrey and Levelt 2000; Poeppel and Hickok 2004), with…”
BackgroundInfluentialWhat did we learn from forty years of research on semantic interference? A Bayesian meta-analysis
Bürki, A., Elbuy, S., Madec, S., & Vasishth, S. (2020) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2020.104125 · Cited by 124
Specifying the role of the left prefrontal cortex in word selection
Riès, S., Karzmark, C. R., Navarrete, E., Knight, R. T., & Dronkers, N. (2015) · Brain and Language · doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2015.07.007 · Cited by 51
“…Janssen et al., 2011; Maess et al., 2002; although see Janssen et al., 2014 for activity in a later time-window: 500–750 ms post-stimulus), which is in the time-window typically attributed to lexical selection (Indefrey, 2011; Indefrey & Levelt, 2004; Levelt et al., 1999; Strijkers & Costa, 2011).”
BackgroundWhat Does a Cue Do? Comparing Phonological and Semantic Cues for Picture Naming in Aphasia
Meteyard, L., & Bose, A. (2018) · Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/2017_jslhr-l-17-0214 · Cited by 83
“A large body of psycho-and neuro-linguistic have shown the effect of specific lexical and image properties on word production (e.g., Indefrey, 2011).”
Piai, V., Roelofs, A., & Maris, E. (2013) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.11.014 · Cited by 85
“Lexical access takes place between about 200 ms post picture-onset and about 145 ms before articulation onset (Indefrey, 2011; Indefrey & Levelt, 2004).”
Klaus, J., & Hartwigsen, G. (2019) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.24597 · Cited by 82
“, 2013; Zhang, Yu, Zhang, Jin, & Li, 2018), arguing for a role of this region in syllabification (Indefrey, 2011).”
BackgroundResultNewman, A. J., Supalla, T. R., Fernandez, N., Newport, E. L., & Bavelier, D. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1510527112 · Cited by 80
“These included the middle STS—an area associated with lexical (lemma) selection and retrieval in studies of spoken languages (29)—and the posterior STS.”
MethodPerret, C., & Bonin, P. (2018) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-018-1100-1 · Cited by 63
“Following the proposals made by Indefrey (2011), they argued that cognitive processes are common up to the point of lexeme encoding.”
Yoo, H., Bowman, D. A., & Oller, D. K. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01510 · Cited by 82
“Obviously, rapid turn taking between speakers requires quick cognitive processing, considering that it takes at least 600ms to prepare a single word production (Indefrey and Levelt, 2004; Indefrey, 2011).”
BackgroundZou, L., Abutalebi, J., Zinszer, B. D., Yan, X., Shu, H., Peng, D., & Ding, G. (2012) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.05.062 · Cited by 83
“In general, the brain areas engaged during picture naming include the left posterior inferior frontal gyrus, the left precentral gyrus, the supplementary motor area, the left middle and posterior parts of the STG and middle temporal gyri, the right middle STG, the left fusiform gyrus, the left anterior insula, the lef…”
BackgroundThe Oxford Handbook of the Mental Lexicon
Anna Papafragou, A., Trueswell, J. C., & Gleitman, L. R. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198845003.001.0001 · Cited by 82
Removing speech artifacts from electroencephalographic recordings during overt picture naming
Porcaro, C., Medaglia, M. T., & Krott, A. (2014) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.10.049 · Cited by 79
“This resulted in a map of the involved brain areas and the time course of their activation (see also the update by Indefrey, 2011).”
InfluentialKrieg, S. M., Sollmann, N., Hauck, T., Ille, S., Meyer, B., & Ringel, F. A. (2014) · BMC Neuroscience · doi:10.1186/1471-2202-15-20 · Cited by 78
“Background The restriction of language function to the classical Broca’s or Wernicke’s area is not compatible anymore [1-3].”
BackgroundStrijkers, K., Costa, A., & Friedemann Pulvermüller, A. (2017) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.09.041 · Cited by 76
“The finding that word frequency modulated activity in the left anterior and posterior-superior temporal cortex, and the left IFG with a similar temporal profile already calls for a revision of serial models of language production which assume that early lexical processes are confined to the temporal cortex (Indefrey,…”
InfluentialRose, S. B., Aristei, S., Melinger, A., & Rahman, R. A. (2018) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1037/xlm0000592 · Cited by 75
“Theoretically, competition models of lexical selection assume that early effects resulting from lexical competition should emerge in the time window of around 200-250ms (Indefry & Levelt, 2004; Indefrey, 2011).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialHu, J., Small, H., Kean, H., Takahashi, A., Zekelman, L., Kleinman, D., Ryan, E., Nieto-Castañón, A., Ferreira, V., & Fedorenko, E. (2023) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhac350 · Cited by 73
Sollmann, N., Tanigawa, N., Ringel, F. A., Zimmer, C., Meyer, B., & Krieg, S. M. (2014) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.09.002 · Cited by 73
“5 s, we applied rTMS pulses 300 ms after the picture presentation onset, according to our current knowledge of the timing of naming-related activity reported in previous studies (Indefrey, 2011; Salmelin et al., 2000; Wheat et al., 2013).”
InfluentialLi, L., Abutalebi, J., Zou, L., Yan, X., Liu, L., Feng, X., Wang, R., Guo, T., & Ding, G. (2015) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.04.007 · Cited by 79
“…language processing, including the inferior frontal gyrus (Broca's area) and superior temporal cortex (Wernicke's area) (Hickok and Poeppel, 2007; Indefrey, 2011; Price, 2010), and those for language control such as the dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC 1 )…”
Riès, S., Dhillon, R. K., Clarke, A., King‐Stephens, D., Laxer, K. D., Weber, P. B., Kuperman, R. A., Auguste, K. I., Brunner, P., Schalk, G., et al. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1620669114 · Cited by 74
Sierpowska, J., Gabarrós, A., Coello, A. F., Camins, À., Castañer, S., Juncadella, M., de Diego‐Balaguer, R., & Rodríguez‐Fornells, A. (2015) · Brain and Language · doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2015.01.005 · Cited by 71
“…speech monitoring (Alario, Chainay, Lehericy, & Cohen, 2006; Chauvel, Rey, Buser, & Bancaud, 1996; Crosson et al., 2001; Fried et al., 1991; Gabarrós et al., 2011; Indefrey, 2011; Indefrey & Levelt, 2004; Krainik et al., 2003; Laplane, Talairach, Meininger, Bancaud, & Orgogozo, 1977; Pai, 1999).”
Structural white matter connectometry of word production in aphasia: an observational study
Hula, W. D., Panesar, S. S., Gravier, M., Yeh, F.-C. F., Dresang, H. C., Dickey, M. W., & Fernandez-Miranda, J. C. (2020) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awaa193 · Cited by 70
“The positive associations between the phonological processing parameter p and both left AF and MdLF are also consistent with findings from meta-analyses of functional activation studies of word production (Indefrey and Levelt, 2004; Indefrey, 2011).”
ResultZhu, X., Damian, M. F., & Zhang, Q. (2015) · Brain and Language · doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2015.03.007 · Cited by 68
“Seven participants were excluded from the EEG analysis because of large electrode drift and excessive artifacts.”
InfluentialPiai, V., Roelofs, A., & van der Meij, R. (2012) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2012.02.050 · Cited by 68
“However, there is also a reason to assume that a certain amount of rescaling 23 should be used (see also Indefrey, 2011).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialHigh frequency gamma activity in the left hippocampus predicts visual object naming performance
Hamamé, C. M., Alario, F. ‐., Llorens, A., Liégeois‐Chauvel, C., & Trébuchon, A. (2014) · Brain and Language · doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2014.05.007 · Cited by 72
Electrophysiological evidence that inhibition supports lexical selection in picture naming
Shao, Z., Roelofs, A., Acheson, D. J., & Meyer, A. S. (2014) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2014.07.009 · Cited by 67
“In a meta-analysis of word production studies, Indefrey and Levelt (2004) and Indefrey (2011), see also Costa et al. (2009), estimated that lexical selection takes place between about 200 to 275 ms after picture onset and phonological code retrieval between 275 and 355 ms. Based on these estimates,…”
Backgroundde Zubicaray, G. I., McMahon, K. L., & Howard, D. (2013) · Language Cognition and Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/01690965.2013.848990 · Cited by 67
“Accordingly, psycholinguistic research has availed itself of electrophysiological and neuroimaging data in order to develop theory relevant to combined cognitive and brain operations, beginning with the meta-analysis of Indefrey and Levelt (2004; also Indefrey, 2011).”
BackgroundMethodDubarry, A., Llorens, A., Trébuchon, A., Carron, R., Liégeois‐Chauvel, C., Bénar, C., & Alario, F. ‐. (2017) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797616681296 · Cited by 66
“2) and our cognitive interpretation of the data (Table 1) are in agreement with many previous findings (Edwards et al., 2010; Indefrey, 2011; Leuthardt et al., 2012; Llorens et al., 2011; see also Munding et al., 2015; Price, 2012).”
BackgroundResultRoelofs, A. (2014) · Japanese Psychological Research · doi:10.1111/jpr.12050 · Cited by 66
What do pauses in narrative production reveal about the nature of word retrieval deficits in PPA?
Mack, J. E., Chandler, S. D., Meltzer‐Asscher, A., Rogalski, E. J., Weıntraub, S., Mesulam, M. M., & Thompson, C. K. (2015) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.08.019 · Cited by 72
“We hypothesized that pause distribution by word class would predict atrophy in regions supporting lemma retrieval, such as the MTG (Indefrey, 2011; Indefrey and Levelt, 2004; Schwartz et al., 2009; de Zubicaray et al., 2002) and/or the IFG, which has been claimed to exert top-down control over…”
InfluentialResponse-Locked Brain Dynamics of Word Production
Riès, S., Janssen, N., Burle, B., & Alario, F. ‐. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0058197 · Cited by 64
“We note that activity in medial frontal regions is not included in the model proposed by [5] contrarily to that proposed by [3].”
BackgroundResultInfluentialWestwood, S. J., & Romani, C. (2017) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.07.031 · Cited by 64
Ishkhanyan, B., Lange, V. M., Boye, K., Mogensen, J., Karabanov, A. N., Hartwigsen, G., & Siebner, H. R. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00685 · Cited by 66
“…duration), it is possible that the facilitation occurred already at the initiation phase when the phonological planning of the grammatical item retrieval occurred, as articulation takes place at an even later point after stimulus onset and involves more posterior cortical regions (Indefrey, 2011).”
BackgroundMissing links: The functional unification of language and memory (L∪M)
Roger, É., Banjac, S., de Schotten, M. T., & Baciu, M. (2021) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.12.012 · Cited by 70
The dual stream model of speech and language processing
Hickok, G. S. (2022) · Handbook of clinical neurology · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-823384-9.00003-7 · Cited by 78
Please Get to the Point! A Cortical Correlate of Linguistic Informativeness
Marini, A., & Urgesi, C. (2012) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00283 · Cited by 68
“ing on language processing unveiled the existence of an articulated cognitive architecture implemented in an extensive array of neural networks (Indefrey, 2011; Indefrey & Levelt, 2004).”
BackgroundHigh-Density EEG in Current Clinical Practice and Opportunities for the Future
Stoyell, S. M., Wilmskoetter, J., Dobrota, M.-A., Chinappen, D. M., Bonilha, L., Mintz, M., Brinkmann, B. H., Herman, S. T., Peters, J. M., Vulliémoz, S., et al. (2021) · Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1097/wnp.0000000000000807 · Cited by 60
Gastaldon, S., Arcara, G., Navarrete, E., & Peressotti, F. (2020) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2020.09.026 · Cited by 60
From blueprints to brain maps: the status of the Lemma Model in cognitive neuroscience
Kemmerer, D. L. (2018) · Language Cognition and Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/23273798.2018.1537498 · Cited by 60
“This is because, as discussed earlier and as pointed out by both Papoutsi et al. (2009) and Indefrey (2011), the left frontal lobe not only implements phonetic encoding and articulation, but also subserves the more abstract process of syllabification.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialKrieg, S. M., Sollmann, N., Tanigawa, N., Förschler, A., Meyer, B., & Ringel, F. A. (2015) · Brain Structure and Function · doi:10.1007/s00429-015-1042-7 · Cited by 59
Dynamic reconfiguration of the language network preceding onset of speech in picture naming
Liljeström, M., Kujala, J., Stevenson, C. M., & Salmelin, R. H. (2014) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.22697 · Cited by 64
“In terms of models proposed for speech production [Indefrey, 2011; Indefrey and Levelt, 2004], differences between the two tasks in the early time window would be associated primarily with perceptual or lexical processing, while processes related to motor planning of speech should be captured within the late time wind…”
BackgroundResultInfluentialValente, A., Bürki, A., & Laganaro, M. (2014) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2014.00390 · Cited by 61
“As is evident from previous reviews (Indefrey and Levelt, 2004; Indefrey, 2011) this issue is particularly complex and our current knowledge, which relies on the comparison of disparate sources of evidence, is still incomplete.”
Semantic processing during language production: an update of the swinging lexical network
Rahman, R. A., & Melinger, A. (2019) · Language Cognition and Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/23273798.2019.1599970 · Cited by 57
Nguyen, V., Versyp, O., Cox, C. M. M., & Fusaroli, R. (2022) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/cdev.13754 · Cited by 71
Roelofs, A., & Ferreira, V. S. (2019) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/10841.003.0006 · Cited by 59
A Bimodal Deep Learning Architecture for EEG-fNIRS Decoding of Overt and Imagined Speech
Cooney, C., Folli, R., & Coyle, D. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/tbme.2021.3132861 · Cited by 60
Decoding levels of representation in reading: A representational similarity approach
Fischer‐Baum, S., Bruggemann, D., Gallego, I. F., Li, D. S. P., & Tamez, E. R. (2017) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2017.02.017 · Cited by 59
The Role of Left Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex in Language Processing
Klaus, J., & Schutter, D. J. L. G. (2018) · Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2018.03.002 · Cited by 65
Kendrick, K. H. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00250 · Cited by 92
“Given that experimental research has shown that speakers need at least 600 ms to plan even a simple word (Indefrey and Levelt, 2004; Indefrey, 2011), processes of language production in conversation must begin well before the current turn ends (Levinson, 2013).”
BackgroundFama, M. E., Hayward, W., Snider, S. F., Friedman, R. B., & Turkeltaub, P. E. (2016) · Brain and Language · doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2016.09.009 · Cited by 63
“In the model, self monitoring occurs via an inner loop that utilizes speech perception areas in the superior temporal gyrus (Indefrey, 2011), but the precise mechanism of monitoring is not critical for the current study (for further discussion of self-monitoring in IS, see Discussion Section 4.4).”
InfluentialBürki, A., Cheneval, P. P., & Laganaro, M. (2015) · Brain and Language · doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2015.08.006 · Cited by 52
Effects of navigated TMS on object and action naming
Hernandez-Pavon, J. C., Mäkelä, N., Lehtinen, H., Lioumis, P., & Mäkelä, J. P. (2014) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00660 · Cited by 55
“Nevertheless, the early onset of the nTMS may also influence conceptual preparation, lexical concept selection, and lemma retrieval attributed to the early stages of picture naming processes (Indefrey and Levelt, 2004; Indefrey, 2011).”
BackgroundGrey and white matter substrates of action naming
Akinina, Y. S., Dragoy, O., Ivanova, M. V., Вячеславовна, И. Е., Андреевна, С. О., Petryshevskii, A. G., Николаевна, Ф. О., Turken, A. U., Shklovsky, V. M., & Dronkers, N. F. (2019) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2019.05.015 · Cited by 53
“Unfortunately, incomplete coverage did not allow us to test existing neuroanatomical picture naming (Indefrey and Levelt, 2004; Indefrey, 2011; Roelofs, 2014) and semantic processing (Binder and Desai, 2011; Gainotti, 2011; Lambon Ralph et al., 2017; Pulvermüller, 2013) accounts that attribute…”
BackgroundInfluentialde Zubicaray, G., Johnson, K., Howard, D., & Mcmahon, K. (2014) · Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2014.01.018 · Cited by 52
Win, K., Pluta, J. B., Yushkevich, P. A., Irwin, D. J., McMillan, C. T., Rascovsky, K., Wolk, D. A., & Grossman, M. (2017) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2017.00330 · Cited by 49
Metadata
- Authors
- Indefrey, P.
- Affiliations
- Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Indefrey, Peter
- Venue
- Frontiers in Psychology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2011
- Volume
- 2
- Pages
- 255-255
- ISSN
- 1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3191502
- OpenAlex
- W2056949810
- Semantic Scholar
- 1d28a8977f5bd27b32e22401d7ebb700d3eb494b
- Cited by
- 767
- References
- 126
- Citations by year
- 2026: 56 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 101 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 61 · 2019: 59 · 2018: 49 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 62 · 2014: 40 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 18
- FWCI
- 13.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- word production, neural correlates, picture naming, left inferior frontal gyrus, inferior parietal cortex, brain structure-function relationship
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