Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41006535›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Spontaneous recruitment of the person-knowledge network by familiar voices in the congenitally blind.

Scott L Fairhall, Katharine B Porter, Claudia Bellucci, M Ida Gobbini

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Scott L FairhallCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences, University of Trento, Trento, Italy. scott.fairhall@unitn.it.
Katharine B PorterDepartment of Psychology, Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Claudia BellucciDepartment of Psychology 'Renzo Canestrari', University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
M Ida GobbiniDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy. mariaida.gobbini@unibo.it.

Funding

European Research Council (ERC) Starting Grant 640594
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recognising a familiar individual involves the spontaneous retrieval of person-specific information, engaging a distributed cortical network for person knowledge. While the role of this system is well established for visual face perception, it remains unclear whether its recruitment depends on visual experience. Here, we investigated the neural basis of voice-identity processing in congenitally blind and sighted individuals using fMRI. Participants listened to personally familiar and unfamiliar voices while performing an identity recognition task. Familiar voices elicited stronger responses across groups in the temporoparietal junction (TPJ), medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), and right middle temporal gyrus. Of these, the TPJ and anterior mPFC-regions typically implicated in the network for person knowledge-showed a more pronounced familiarity effect in congenitally blind participants than in sighted controls. Multivariate analysis further revealed stronger identity-specific representations in the blind in the right TPJ, adjacent to the region showing enhanced univariate responses, as well as in the left intraparietal sulcus. These findings demonstrate that voice-identity cues alone can drive spontaneous access to person knowledge in the absence of visual input in both the normally sighted and the blind, but engagement of this network is stronger in the blind. These results indicate that the network for person knowledge develops in a modality-flexible manner shaped by the social demands of interpersonal interaction.

Indexed as

BlindnessRecognition, PsychologyVoiceAdultBrain MappingFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID41006535
PMCPMC12475194

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.