Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38370843›Full record

ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024

Speech-induced suppression and vocal feedback sensitivity in human cortex.

Muge Ozker, Leyao Yu, Patricia Dugan, Werner Doyle, Daniel Friedman, Orrin Devinsky, Adeen Flinker

Open access · greenAbstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Muge OzkerNeurology Department, New York University, New York, 10016, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7472-4528
Leyao YuNeurology Department, New York University, New York, 10016, NY, USA.
Patricia DuganNeurology Department, New York University, New York, 10016, NY, USA.
Werner DoyleNeurosurgery Department, New York University, New York, 10016, NY, USA.
Daniel FriedmanNeurology Department, New York University, New York, 10016, NY, USA.
Orrin DevinskyNeurology Department, New York University, New York, 10016, NY, USA.
Adeen FlinkerNeurology Department, New York University, New York, 10016, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1247-1283
New York University · USMax Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics · NL

Funding

Diagnostic validity and safety of high-gamma language mapping with intracranial EEGR01NS115929 · NINDS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Ravindra Arya, NATHAN E CRONE · 2020 to 2026
$3.9M
Characterizing the temporal processing of speech in the human auditory cortexR01DC018805 · NIDCD · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI FLINKER, ADEEN, MESGARANI, NIMA · 2021 to 2025
$3.3M
Spatiotemporal Organization of the Inferior Frontal Gyrus During Speech Production - Resubmission - 1R01NS109367 · NINDS · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI FLINKER, ADEEN · 2019 to 2023
$2.8M
Intracranial Neurophysiology of Auditory Feedback Control During Speech Production - Resubmission - 1F32DC018200 · NIDCD · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI SERTEL, MUGE OZKER · 2020 to 2021
$86k
NIDCD NIH HHS F32 DC018200NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC018805NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS109367NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS115929
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Across the animal kingdom, neural responses in the auditory cortex are suppressed during vocalization, and humans are no exception. A common hypothesis is that suppression increases sensitivity to auditory feedback, enabling the detection of vocalization errors. This hypothesis has been previously confirmed in non-human primates, however a direct link between auditory suppression and sensitivity in human speech monitoring remains elusive. To address this issue, we obtained intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG) recordings from 35 neurosurgical participants during speech production. We first characterized the detailed topography of auditory suppression, which varied across superior temporal gyrus (STG). Next, we performed a delayed auditory feedback (DAF) task to determine whether the suppressed sites were also sensitive to auditory feedback alterations. Indeed, overlapping sites showed enhanced responses to feedback, indicating sensitivity. Importantly, there was a strong correlation between the degree of auditory suppression and feedback sensitivity, suggesting suppression might be a key mechanism that underlies speech monitoring. Further, we found that when participants produced speech with simultaneous auditory feedback, posterior STG was selectively activated if participants were engaged in a DAF paradigm, suggesting that increased attentional load can modulate auditory feedback sensitivity.

Identifiers

PMID38370843
PMCPMC10871232
OpenAlexW4389556546

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.