Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25948269›Full record

Trial reportThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2015

Dynamic encoding of speech sequence probability in human temporal cortex.

Matthew K Leonard, Kristofer E Bouchard, Claire Tang, Edward F Chang

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report 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 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
–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

40 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. High-level language brain regions process sublexical regularities.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Matthew K LeonardDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94158.
Kristofer E BouchardDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94158, Department of Physiology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94158, Computational Research Division, Lawrence-Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, and.
Claire TangNeuroscience Graduate Program, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94158.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2742-7536
Edward F ChangDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94158, Department of Physiology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94158, ChangEd@neurosurg.ucsf.edu.

Funding

Functional organization of the superior temporal gyrus for speech perceptionR01DC012379 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Edward Chang · 2012 to 2026
$8.3M
Neocortical Mechanisms of Categorical Speech PerceptionR00NS065120 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI CHANG, EDWARD · 2010 to 2012
$729k
The Neurophysiological Dynamics of Lexical and Sub-Lexical RepresentationsF32DC013486 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI LEONARD, MATTHEW KANTER · 2013 to 2016
$168k
NIDCD NIH HHS F32 DC013486NIDCD NIH HHS F32-DC013486NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC012379NIDCD NIH HHS R01-DC012379NIH HHS DP2-OD00862NINDS NIH HHS R00 NS065120NINDS NIH HHS R00-NS065120
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sensory processing involves identification of stimulus features, but also integration with the surrounding sensory and cognitive context. Previous work in animals and humans has shown fine-scale sensitivity to context in the form of learned knowledge about the statistics of the sensory environment, including relative probabilities of discrete units in a stream of sequential auditory input. These statistics are a defining characteristic of one of the most important sequential signals humans encounter: speech. For speech, extensive exposure to a language tunes listeners to the statistics of sound sequences. To address how speech sequence statistics are neurally encoded, we used high-resolution direct cortical recordings from human lateral superior temporal cortex as subjects listened to words and nonwords with varying transition probabilities between sound segments. In addition to their sensitivity to acoustic features (including contextual features, such as coarticulation), we found that neural responses dynamically encoded the language-level probability of both preceding and upcoming speech sounds. Transition probability first negatively modulated neural responses, followed by positive modulation of neural responses, consistent with coordinated predictive and retrospective recognition processes, respectively. Furthermore, transition probability encoding was different for real English words compared with nonwords, providing evidence for online interactions with high-order linguistic knowledge. These results demonstrate that sensory processing of deeply learned stimuli involves integrating physical stimulus features with their contextual sequential structure. Despite not being consciously aware of phoneme sequence statistics, listeners use this information to process spoken input and to link low-level acoustic representations with linguistic information about word identity and meaning.

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationAuditory PerceptionElectrodes, ImplantedEvoked Potentials, AuditoryFemaleHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesSpeechSpeech PerceptionTemporal Lobeauditoryelectrocorticographysequencesspeech

Identifiers

PMID25948269
PMCPMC4420784

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.