ReviewBrain communications2025
Networks for proper versus common name retrieval: insights from causal mapping and new hypotheses.
Review in Brain communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The reading brain - Transforming vision into language.Progress in neurobiology · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the years, the anatomical correlates of common name and proper name retrieval have been studied and discussed side by side in the field of cognitive neuroscience. Due to the particular semantic status of proper names (i.e. meaningless marker referring to unique entities with a token link), it is generally acknowledged that their lexical retrieval is cognitively more demanding than that of common names. Thus, the neural networks engaged for accessing the phonological output lexicon of common names and proper names could be partially segregated, centred on different cortical regions and underpinned by distinct structural pathways. However, this possible anatomo-functional organization has not yet been explored in an in-depth review. Hence, the objective of our review is 3-fold: (i) to highlight the cortical networks underlying common name and proper name retrieval; (ii) to summarize the findings from recent studies using causal methods of tract-oriented functional mapping (i.e. direct electrostimulation and disconnection-symptom mapping) with the aim of isolating ventral structural connections that contribute to common name and/or proper name retrieval; (iii) to develop hypotheses regarding the anatomical connectivity implicated in lexical access to common names and proper names, in relation to the input modality and semantic category (for proper names, in the latter case). Our critical review first suggests that, although both categories appear to rely on a widely distributed and overlapping left fronto-temporo-parietal cortical network, the mid-to-posterior part of the ventral temporal cortex (especially the fusiform gyrus) and the anterior temporal structures (including the temporal pole), seem more specifically involved in common name retrieval and in proper name retrieval respectively, regardless of their input modality. Second, the left inferior longitudinal fasciculus appears to play a crucial role in picture-based lexical retrieval for both common names and proper names. Based on these key findings, we propose tentative models of anatomical connections underlying lexical retrieval. We suggest that distinct components of the inferior longitudinal fasciculus are implicated in lexical retrieval for common names and proper names and that another similar segregation mediates the retrieval of face names and landmark names. We further hypothesize that the left middle longitudinal fasciculus plays a role in auditory-guided lexical retrieval, owing to its projections into the anterior temporal structures and its close relationship with the auditory associative cortex. Within the framework of the dual-language model, we discuss the heuristic value of these anatomical hypotheses to understand the mechanisms by which anomia arises in various neurological conditions, providing insights and directions for future studies.
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.