Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29358073›Full record

ArticleCurrent biology : CB2018

Phase Entrainment of Brain Oscillations Causally Modulates Neural Responses to Intelligible Speech.

Benedikt Zoefel, Alan Archer-Boyd, Matthew H Davis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current biology : CB, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease: Navigating the Roadblocks to Clinical Implementation.Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society · 2026
    Review
  7. Cutaneous Alternating Current Stimulation Can Cause a Phasic Modulation of Speech Perception.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. "What" and "When" Predictions Jointly Modulate Speech Processing.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Benedikt ZoefelMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Road, Cambridge CB2 7EF, UK. Electronic address: benedikt.zoefel@mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk.
Alan Archer-BoydMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Road, Cambridge CB2 7EF, UK.
Matthew H DavisMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Road, Cambridge CB2 7EF, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U105580446Medical Research Council MC_UU_00005/5
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to their periodic nature, neural oscillations might represent an optimal "tool" for the processing of rhythmic stimulus input [1-3]. Indeed, the alignment of neural oscillations to a rhythmic stimulus, often termed phase entrainment, has been repeatedly demonstrated [4-7]. Phase entrainment is central to current theories of speech processing [8-10] and has been associated with successful speech comprehension [11-17]. However, typical manipulations that reduce speech intelligibility (e.g., addition of noise and time reversal [11, 12, 14, 16, 17]) could destroy critical acoustic cues for entrainment (such as "acoustic edges" [7]). Hence, the association between phase entrainment and speech intelligibility might only be "epiphenomenal"; i.e., both decline due to the same manipulation, without any causal link between the two [18]. Here, we use transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS [19]) to manipulate the phase lag between neural oscillations and speech rhythm while measuring neural responses to intelligible and unintelligible vocoded stimuli with sparse fMRI. We found that this manipulation significantly modulates the BOLD response to intelligible speech in the superior temporal gyrus, and the strength of BOLD modulation is correlated with a phasic modulation of performance in a behavioral task. Importantly, these findings are absent for unintelligible speech and during sham stimulation; we thus demonstrate that phase entrainment has a specific, causal influence on neural responses to intelligible speech. Our results not only provide an important step toward understanding the neural foundation of human abilities at speech comprehension but also suggest new methods for enhancing speech perception that can be explored in the future.

Indexed as

AdultBrainComprehensionFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedSpeech IntelligibilitySpeech PerceptionTranscranial Direct Current StimulationYoung AdultBOLDentrainmentfMRIintelligibilityoscillationphaserhythmspeechtACStranscranial alternating current stimulation

Identifiers

PMID29358073
PMCPMC5807089

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.