Cited by 172Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismLanguage Development and DisordersReading and Literacy Development

Broca's area, sentence comprehension, and working memory: an fMRI study

Open access
Rogalsky, Corianne·2008·Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

Abstract

The role of Broca's area in sentence processing remains controversial. According to one view, Broca's area is involved in processing a subcomponent of syntactic processing. Another view holds that it contributes to sentence processing via verbal working memory. Sub-regions of Broca's area have been identified that are more active during the processing of complex (object-relative clause) sentences compared to simple (subject-relative clause) sentences. The present study aimed to determine if this complexity effect can be accounted for in terms of the articulatory rehearsal component of verbal working memory. In a behavioral experiment, subjects were asked to comprehend sentences during concurrent speech articulation which minimizes articulatory rehearsal as a resource for sentence comprehension. A finger-tapping task was used as a control concurrent task. Only the object-relative clause sentences were more difficult to comprehend during speech articulation than during the manual task, showing that articulatory rehearsal does contribute to sentence processing. A second experiment used fMRI to document the brain regions underlying this effect. Subjects judged the plausibility of sentences during speech articulation, a finger-tapping task, or without a concurrent task. In the absence of a secondary task, Broca's area (pars triangularis and pars opercularis) demonstrated an increase in activity as a function of syntactic complexity. However, during concurrent speech articulation (but not finger-tapping) this complexity effect was eliminated in the pars opercularis suggesting that this region supports sentence comprehension via its role in articulatory rehearsal. Activity in the pars triangularis was modulated by the finger-tapping task, but not the speech articulation task.

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 · 10.3389/neuro.09.014.2008

Cites

71 of 71 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?

  • Activation during processing of syntactically complex sentences has also been assigned to area 45 (triangular part).

    “However, activation during processing of syntactically complex sentences was also assigned to area 45 (triangular part) in studies using semantic plausibility judgment tasks or sentence picture-matching tasks [22],[23].”

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: 5

  1. Baddeley A. D. (1986). Working Memory. Oxford, Clarendon Press3099697
  2. Bradley D. C. Garrett M. E. Zurif E. B. (1980). Syntactic deficits in Broca's aphasia. In Biological Studies of Mental Processes, Caplan D. ed. (Cambridge, MA, MIT Press).
  3. Goodglass H. (1976). Agrammatism. In Studies in Neurolinguistics Vol. 1., Whitaker H. Whitaker H. A. eds (New York, Academic Press).
  4. Linebarger M. C. (1990). Neuropsychology of sentence parsing. In Cognitive Neuropsychology and Neurolingustics: Advances in Models of Cognitive Function and Impairment, Caramazza A. ed. (Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum), pp. 55– 122
  5. Talairach J. Tournoux P. (1988). Co-planar Stereotaxic Altas of the Human Brain. New York, Thieme Medical Publishers, p. 122

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rogalsky, C.
Affiliations
University of California, Irvine (US)
Corresponding author
Rogalsky, Corianne
Venue
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Published
2008
Volume
2
Pages
14-14
ISSN
1662-5161 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2131782017
Cited by
172
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 13
FWCI
2.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • University of California, Irvine
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R01DC003681)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
Broca's area, sentence comprehension, working memory, articulatory rehearsal, syntactic complexity, object relative clauses, pars opercularis, pars triangularis, finger tapping task

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