Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25788691›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2015

A trade-off between somatosensory and auditory related brain activity during object naming but not reading.

Mohamed L Seghier, Thomas M H Hope, Susan Prejawa, 'Ōiwi Parker Jones, Melanie Vitkovitch, Cathy J Price

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Neural Development of Speech Sensorimotor Learning.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mohamed L SeghierWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, UCL, London WC1N 3BG, United Kingdom, m.seghier@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1146-8800
Thomas M H HopeWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, UCL, London WC1N 3BG, United Kingdom.
Susan PrejawaWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, UCL, London WC1N 3BG, United Kingdom.
'Ōiwi Parker JonesWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, UCL, London WC1N 3BG, United Kingdom, Wolfson College, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6UD, United Kingdom, and.
Melanie VitkovitchSchool of Psychology, University of East London, Water Lane, London E15 4LZ, United Kingdom.
Cathy J PriceWellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, UCL, London WC1N 3BG, United Kingdom.
Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging · GBUniversity of East London · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 091593Wellcome Trust 097720
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The parietal operculum, particularly the cytoarchitectonic area OP1 of the secondary somatosensory area (SII), is involved in somatosensory feedback. Using fMRI with 58 human subjects, we investigated task-dependent differences in SII/OP1 activity during three familiar speech production tasks: object naming, reading and repeatedly saying "1-2-3." Bilateral SII/OP1 was significantly suppressed (relative to rest) during object naming, to a lesser extent when repeatedly saying "1-2-3" and not at all during reading. These results cannot be explained by task difficulty but the contrasting difference between naming and reading illustrates how the demands on somatosensory activity change with task, even when motor output (i.e., production of object names) is matched. To investigate what determined SII/OP1 deactivation during object naming, we searched the whole brain for areas where activity increased as that in SII/OP1 decreased. This across subject covariance analysis revealed a region in the right superior temporal sulcus (STS) that lies within the auditory cortex, and is activated by auditory feedback during speech production. The tradeoff between activity in SII/OP1 and STS was not observed during reading, which showed significantly more activation than naming in both SII/OP1 and STS bilaterally. These findings suggest that, although object naming is more error prone than reading, subjects can afford to rely more or less on somatosensory or auditory feedback during naming. In contrast, fast and efficient error-free reading places more consistent demands on both types of feedback, perhaps because of the potential for increased competition between lexical and sublexical codes at the articulatory level.

Indexed as

ReadingAdultAuditory CortexBrain MappingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhotic StimulationSomatosensory CortexSpeechYoung Adultfunctional MRInamingparietal operculumreadingsomatosensory cortexspeech production

Identifiers

PMID25788691
PMCPMC4363398
OpenAlexW1993990009

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.