Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25274987›Full record

ArticleCerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991)2015

Dissociating Contributions of the Motor Cortex to Speech Perception and Response Bias by Using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.

Eleonore H M Smalle, Jack Rogers, Riikka Möttönen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Left motor cortex contributes to auditory phonological discrimination.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Is Phonology Embodied? Evidence from Mechanical Stimulation.Journal of psycholinguistic research · 2022
    Article
  11. What Happened to Mirror Neurons?Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Asymmetry of Auditory-Motor Speech Processing is Determined by Language Experience.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Facilitation of motor excitability during listening to spoken sentences is not modulated by noise or semantic coherence.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2018
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Eleonore H M SmalleDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3UD, UK Psychological Sciences Research Institute, Institute of Neuroscience, Université Catholique de Louvain, B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Jack RogersDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3UD, UK.
Riikka MöttönenDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3UD, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council G1000566Wellcome Trust WT091070AIA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent studies using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) have demonstrated that disruptions of the articulatory motor cortex impair performance in demanding speech perception tasks. These findings have been interpreted as support for the idea that the motor cortex is critically involved in speech perception. However, the validity of this interpretation has been called into question, because it is unknown whether the TMS-induced disruptions in the motor cortex affect speech perception or rather response bias. In the present TMS study, we addressed this question by using signal detection theory to calculate sensitivity (i.e., d') and response bias (i.e., criterion c). We used repetitive TMS to temporarily disrupt the lip or hand representation in the left motor cortex. Participants discriminated pairs of sounds from a "ba"-"da" continuum before TMS, immediately after TMS (i.e., during the period of motor disruption), and after a 30-min break. We found that the sensitivity for between-category pairs was reduced during the disruption of the lip representation. In contrast, disruption of the hand representation temporarily reduced response bias. This double dissociation indicates that the hand motor cortex contributes to response bias during demanding discrimination tasks, whereas the articulatory motor cortex contributes to perception of speech sounds.

Indexed as

Transcranial Magnetic StimulationAdultFemaleHandHumansLipMaleMotor CortexSignal Detection, PsychologicalSpeech PerceptionYoung Adultaction selectionauditory-motorcategorical perceptionsensorimotorsignal detection theory

Identifiers

PMID25274987
PMCPMC4585509

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.