Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32283276›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2020

Revealing the neural networks that extract conceptual gestalts from continuously evolving or changing semantic contexts.

Francesca M Branzi, Gina F Humphreys, Paul Hoffman, Matthew A Lambon Ralph

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Resolving the Abstract-Concrete Paradox in the Angular Gyrus: A Multimethod Investigation.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. The Relationship between White Matter Architecture and Language Lateralization in the Healthy Brain.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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.

Francesca M BranziMRC Cognition & Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Road, Cambridge, CB2 7EF, UK. Electronic address: Francesca.Branzi@mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk.
Gina F HumphreysMRC Cognition & Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Road, Cambridge, CB2 7EF, UK.
Paul HoffmanSchool of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH8 9JZ, UK.
Matthew A Lambon RalphMRC Cognition & Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Road, Cambridge, CB2 7EF, UK. Electronic address: Matt.Lambon-Ralph@mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00005/18Medical Research Council MR/R023883/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reading a book, understanding the news reports or any other behaviour involving the processing of meaningful stimuli requires the semantic system to have two main features: being active during an extended period of time and flexibly adapting the internal representation according to the changing environment. Despite being key features of many everyday tasks, formation and updating of the semantic "gestalt" are still poorly understood. In this fMRI study we used naturalistic stimuli and task manipulations to identify the neural network that forms and updates conceptual gestalts during time-extended integration of meaningful stimuli. Univariate and multivariate techniques allowed us to draw a distinction between networks that are crucial for the formation of a semantic gestalt (meaning integration) and those that instead are important for linking incoming cues about the current context (e.g., time and space cues) into a schema representation. Specifically, we revealed that time-extended formation of the conceptual gestalt was reflected in the neuro-computations of the anterior temporal lobe accompanied by multi-demand areas and hippocampus, with a key role of brain structures in the right hemisphere. This "semantic gestalt network" was strongly recruited when an update of the current semantic representation was required during narrative processing. A distinct fronto-parietal network, instead, was recruited for context integration, independently from the meaning associations between words (semantic coherence). Finally, in contrast with accounts positing that the default mode network (DMN) may have a crucial role in semantic cognition, our findings revealed that DMN activity was sensitive to task difficulty, but not to semantic integration. The implications of these findings for neurocognitive models of semantic cognition and the literature on narrative processing are discussed.

Indexed as

AdultBrainCognitionComprehensionConcept FormationFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNerve NetYoung AdultContextfMRIICANarrativeSemantic

Identifiers

PMID32283276
PMCPMC7573538

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.