ArticleNeurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.)2025
Using Rapid Invisible Frequency Tagging (RIFT) to Probe the Neural Interaction Between Representations of Speech Planning and Comprehension.
Article in Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamic competition between bottom-up saliency and top-down goals in early visual cortex.Communications biology · 2026Article
- Dissociating external and internal attentional selection.iScience · 2025Article
- A collaborative guide to Rapid Invisible Frequency Tagging (RIFT): Methods, insights, and recommendations.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
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
Interlocutors often use the semantics of comprehended speech to inform the semantics of planned speech. Do representations of the comprehension and planning stimuli interact? In this EEG study, we used rapid invisible frequency tagging (RIFT) to better understand the attentional distribution to representations of comprehension and speech planning stimuli, and how they interact in the neural signal. To do this, we leveraged the picture-word interference (PWI) paradigm with delayed naming, where participants simultaneously comprehend auditory distractors (auditory [f1]; tagged at 54 Hz) while preparing to name related or unrelated target pictures (visual [f2]; tagged at 68 Hz). RIFT elicits steady-state evoked potentials, which reflect allocation of attention to the tagged stimuli. When representations of the tagged stimuli interact, increased power has been observed at the intermodulation frequency resulting from an interaction of the base frequencies (f2 ± f1; Drijvers et al., 2021). Our results showed clear power increases at 54 Hz and 68 Hz during the tagging window, but no power difference between the related and unrelated condition. Interestingly, we observed a larger power difference in the intermodulation frequency (compared to baseline) in the unrelated compared to the related condition (68 Hz - 54 Hz: 14 Hz), indicating stronger interaction between unrelated auditory and visual representations. Our results go beyond standard PWI results by showing that participants' difficulties in the related condition do not arise from allocating attention to the pictures or distractors. Instead, processing difficulties arise during interaction of the concepts or lemmas invoked by the two stimuli, thus, we conclude, that interaction might be downregulated in the related condition.
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.