ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2022
Phonological Working Memory Representations in the Left Inferior Parietal Lobe in the Face of Distraction and Neural Stimulation.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Relationship Between the Phonological Processing Network and the Tip-of-the-Tongue Phenomenon: Evidence from Large-Scale DTI Data.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Neural Mechanisms of Private Speech in Second Language Learners' Oral Production: An fNIRS Study.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- The role of variation in phonological and semantic working memory capacities in sentence comprehension: neural evidence from healthy and brain-damaged individuals.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2025Review
- Transcranial Brain Stimulation for Neurodevelopmental Disorders : Neuromodulation and Neurodevelopmental Disorders.Galen medical journal · 2025Review
- Wernicke's functional neuroanatomy model of language turns 150: what became of its psychological reflex arcs?Brain structure & function · 2024Review
- Is working memory domain-general or domain-specific?Trends in cognitive sciences · 2024Review
- Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Applications in the Study of Executive Functions: A Review.Brain and behavior · 2024Review
- Precision of phonological errors in aphasia supports resource models of phonological working memory in language production.Cognitive neuropsychology · 2023Article
- Increased brain activation and functional connectivity after working memory training in patients with ischemic stroke: an fMRI study.Frontiers in stroke · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The neural basis of phonological working memory (WM) was investigated through an examination of the effects of irrelevant speech distractors and disruptive neural stimulation from transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Embedded processes models argue that the same regions involved in speech perception are used to support phonological WM whereas buffer models assume that a region separate from speech perception regions is used to support WM. Thus, according to the embedded processes approach but not the buffer approach, irrelevant speech and TMS to the speech perception region should disrupt the decoding of phonological WM representations. According to the buffer account, decoding of WM items should be possible in the buffer region despite distraction and should be disrupted with TMS to this region. Experiment 1 used fMRI and representational similarity analyses (RSA) with a delayed recognition memory paradigm using nonword stimuli. Results showed that decoding of memory items in the speech perception regions (superior temporal gyrus, STG) was possible in the absence of distractors. However, the decoding evidence in the left STG was susceptible to interference from distractors presented during the delay period whereas decoding in the proposed buffer region (supramarginal gyrus, SMG) persisted. Experiment 2 examined the causal roles of the speech processing region and the buffer region in phonological WM performance using TMS. TMS to the SMG during the early delay period caused a disruption in recognition performance for the memory nonwords, whereas stimulations at the STG and an occipital control region did not affect WM performance. Taken together, results from the two experiments are consistent with predictions of a buffer model of phonological WM, pointing to a critical role of the left SMG in maintaining phonological representations.
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.