Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32317387›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2020

The Domain-General Multiple Demand (MD) Network Does Not Support Core Aspects of Language Comprehension: A Large-Scale fMRI Investigation.

Evgeniia Diachek, Idan Blank, Matthew Siegelman, Josef Affourtit, Evelina Fedorenko

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 97 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
97citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

97 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The Extended Language Network: Language-Responsive Brain Areas Whose Contributions to Language Remain To Be Discovered.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

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

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

5 authors.

Evgeniia DiachekDepartment of Psychology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee 37203 ediachek@mit.edu evelina9@mit.edu.
Idan BlankDepartment of Psychology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90095.ORCID 0000-0001-7057-8391
Matthew SiegelmanDepartment of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027.
Josef AffourtitDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139.
Evelina FedorenkoDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 ediachek@mit.edu evelina9@mit.edu.

Funding

Functional reorganization of the language and domain-general multiple demand systems in aphasiaR01DC016950 · NIDCD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI FEDORENKO, EVELINA, KIRAN, SWATHI · 2019 to 2023
$3.2M
The neural architecture of pragmatic processingR01DC016607 · NIDCD · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI FEDORENKO, EVELINA · 2018 to 2022
$2.4M
fMRI investigations of the functional architecture of the language systemR00HD057522 · NICHD · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI FEDORENKO, EVELINA · 2014 to 2016
$738k
NICHD NIH HHS R00 HD057522NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC016607NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC016950
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aside from the language-selective left-lateralized frontotemporal network, language comprehension sometimes recruits a domain-general bilateral frontoparietal network implicated in executive functions: the multiple demand (MD) network. However, the nature of the MD network's contributions to language comprehension remains debated. To illuminate the role of this network in language processing in humans, we conducted a large-scale fMRI investigation using data from 30 diverse word and sentence comprehension experiments (481 unique participants [female and male], 678 scanning sessions). In line with prior findings, the MD network was active during many language tasks. Moreover, similar to the language-selective network, which is robustly lateralized to the left hemisphere, these responses were stronger in the left-hemisphere MD regions. However, in contrast with the language-selective network, the MD network responded more strongly (1) to lists of unconnected words than to sentences, and (2) in paradigms with an explicit task compared with passive comprehension paradigms. Indeed, many passive comprehension tasks failed to elicit a response above the fixation baseline in the MD network, in contrast to strong responses in the language-selective network. Together, these results argue against a role for the MD network in core aspects of sentence comprehension, such as inhibiting irrelevant meanings or parses, keeping intermediate representations active in working memory, or predicting upcoming words or structures. These results align with recent evidence of relatively poor tracking of the linguistic signal by the MD regions during naturalistic comprehension, and instead suggest that the MD network's engagement during language processing reflects effort associated with extraneous task demands.

Indexed as

LanguageAdolescentAdultAgedBrainBrain MappingComprehensionExecutive FunctionFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNerve NetPhotic StimulationYoung Adultdomain-general networkfMRIlanguage network

Identifiers

PMID32317387
PMCPMC7275862

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.