MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cortical Activation during Spoken-Word Segmentation in Nonreading-Impaired and Dyslexic Adults

2002· article· en· W1942631690 on OpenAlexaff
Päivi Helenius, Riitta Salmelin, Elisabet Service, John F. Connolly, Seija Leinonen, Heikki Lyytinen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersSuomen KulttuurirahastoAcademy of Finland
KeywordsPsychologySentenceMagnetoencephalographyContext (archaeology)Temporal lobeAuditory cortexAudiologyCognitive psychologyNeuroscienceLinguisticsMedicineElectroencephalography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used magnetoencephalography to elucidate the cortical activation associated with the segmentation of spoken words in nonreading-impaired and dyslexic adults. The subjects listened to binaurally presented sentences where the sentence-ending words were either semantically appropriate or inappropriate to the preceding sentence context. Half of the inappropriate final words shared two or three initial phonemes with the highly expected semantically appropriate words. Two temporally and functionally distinct response patterns were detected in the superior temporal lobe. The first response peaked at approximately 100 msec in the supratemporal plane and showed no sensitivity to the semantic appropriateness of the final word. This presemantic N100m response was abnormally strong in the left hemisphere of dyslexic individuals. After the N100m response, the semantically inappropriate sentence-ending words evoked stronger activation than the expected endings in the superior temporal cortex in the vicinity of the auditory cortex. This N400m response was delayed for words starting with the same two or three first few phonemes as the expected words but only until the first evidence of acoustic-phonetic dissimilarity emerged. This subtle delay supports the notion of initial lexical access being based on phonemes or acoustic features. In dyslexic participants, this qualitative aspect of word processing appeared to be normal. However, for all words alike, the ascending slope of the semantic activation in the left hemisphere was delayed by approximately 50 msec as compared with control subjects. The delay in the auditory N400m response in dyslexic subjects is likely to result from presemantic-phonological deficits possibly reflected in the abnormal N100m response.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations129
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207