ArticleBrain and language2016
The neural circuits recruited for the production of signs and fingerspelled words.
Article in Brain and language, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Functional neuroanatomy of language without speech: An ALE meta-analysis of sign language.Human brain mapping · 2021Pooled it
- Asymetric Event-Related Potential Priming Effects Between English Letters and American Sign Language Fingerspelling Fonts.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2023Article
- Fingerspelling and Its Role in Translanguaging.Languages (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Sign and Spoken Language Processing Differences in the Brain: A Brief Review of Recent Research.Annals of neurosciences · 2022Review
- New Perspectives on the Neurobiology of Sign Languages.Frontiers in communication · 2021Article
- The role of the superior parietal lobule in lexical processing of sign language: Insights from fMRI and TMS.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2021Article
- Sign Language: How the Brain Represents Phonology without Sound.Current biology : CB · 2020Article
- Cortical Encoding of Manual Articulatory and Linguistic Features in American Sign Language.Current biology : CB · 2020Observational
- Pre-output Language Monitoring in Sign Production.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2020Article
- The Neural Network for Sign Language Comprehension.Language and linguistics compassArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Signing differs from typical non-linguistic hand actions because movements are not visually guided, finger movements are complex (particularly for fingerspelling), and signs are not produced as holistic gestures. We used positron emission tomography to investigate the neural circuits involved in the production of American Sign Language (ASL). Different types of signs (one-handed (articulated in neutral space), two-handed (neutral space), and one-handed body-anchored signs) were elicited by asking deaf native signers to produce sign translations of English words. Participants also fingerspelled (one-handed) printed English words. For the baseline task, participants indicated whether a word contained a descending letter. Fingerspelling engaged ipsilateral motor cortex and cerebellar cortex in contrast to both one-handed signs and the descender baseline task, which may reflect greater timing demands and complexity of handshape sequences required for fingerspelling. Greater activation in the visual word form area was also observed for fingerspelled words compared to one-handed signs. Body-anchored signs engaged bilateral superior parietal cortex to a greater extent than the descender baseline task and neutral space signs, reflecting the motor control and proprioceptive monitoring required to direct the hand toward a specific location on the body. Less activation in parts of the motor circuit was observed for two-handed signs compared to one-handed signs, possibly because, for half of the signs, handshape and movement goals were spread across the two limbs. Finally, the conjunction analysis comparing each sign type with the descender baseline task revealed common activation in the supramarginal gyrus bilaterally, which we interpret as reflecting phonological retrieval and encoding processes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.