MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102705657 · doi:10.1162/0898929041502616

Modulation of Motor Excitability during Speech Perception: The Role of Broca's Area

2004· article· en· W2102705657 on OpenAlexaff
Kate E. Watkins, Tomáš Paus

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cognitive Neuroscience · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBroca's areaPsychologyNeurocomputational speech processingTranscranial magnetic stimulationPerceptionSpeech perceptionMirror neuronPremotor cortexNeuroscienceMotor systemInferior frontal gyrusMotor theory of speech perceptionSpeech productionAudiologyCognitive psychologyStimulationFunctional magnetic resonance imagingSpeech recognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies in both human and nonhuman primates indicate that motor and premotor cortical regions participate in auditory and visual perception of actions. Previous studies, using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), showed that perceiving visual and auditory speech increased the excitability of the orofacial motor system during speech perception. Such studies, however, cannot tell us which brain regions mediate this effect. In this study, we used the technique of combining positron emission tomography with TMS to identify the brain regions that modulate the excitability of the motor system during speech perception. Our results show that during auditory speech perception, there is increased excitability of motor system underlying speech production and that this increase is significantly correlated with activity in the posterior part of the left inferior frontal gyrus (Broca's area). We propose that this area "primes" the motor system in response to heard speech even when no speech output is required and, as such, operates at the interface of perception and action.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations267
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cognitive NeuroscienceSame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207