ArticleJournal of neuroscience research2023
Arithmetic in the signing brain: Differences and similarities in arithmetic processing between deaf signers and hearing non-signers.
Article in Journal of neuroscience research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differential cross-modal functional plasticity in deaf individuals: A meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies.iScience · 2026Article
- Math skills and microstructure of the middle longitudinal fasciculus: A developmental investigation.PloS one · 2025Article
- Differences in the amplitude of dynamic low-frequency fluctuations in primary angle-closure glaucoma are associated with gene-molecular multi-omics.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Arithmetic in the signing brain: Differences and similarities in arithmetic processing between deaf signers and hearing non-signers.Journal of neuroscience research · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Deaf signers and hearing non-signers have previously been shown to recruit partially different brain regions during simple arithmetic. In light of the triple code model, the differences were interpreted as relating to stronger recruitment of the verbal system of numerical processing, that is, left angular and inferior frontal gyrus, in hearing non-signers, and of the quantity system of numerical processing, that is, right horizontal intraparietal sulcus, for deaf signers. The main aim of the present study was to better understand similarities and differences in the neural correlates supporting arithmetic in deaf compared to hearing individuals. Twenty-nine adult deaf signers and 29 hearing non-signers were enrolled in an functional magnetic resonance imaging study of simple and difficult subtraction and multiplication. Brain imaging data were analyzed using whole-brain analysis, region of interest analysis, and functional connectivity analysis. Although the groups were matched on age, gender, and nonverbal intelligence, the deaf group performed generally poorer than the hearing group in arithmetic. Nevertheless, we found generally similar networks to be involved for both groups, the only exception being the involvement of the left inferior frontal gyrus. This region was activated significantly stronger for the hearing compared to the deaf group but showed stronger functional connectivity with the left superior temporal gyrus in the deaf, compared to the hearing, group. These results lend no support to increased recruitment of the quantity system in deaf signers. Perhaps the reason for performance differences is to be found in other brain regions not included in the original triple code model.
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.