About the mechanisms of auditory verbal hallucinations: a positron emission tomographic study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Auditory verbal hallucinations (AVHs) likely result from disorders, as yet unspecified, of the neural mechanisms of language. Here we examine the functional neuroanatomy of single-word reading in patients with and without a history of AVH. METHOD: Eighteen medicated schizophrenia patients (8 with AVH and 10 without AVH) and 12 healthy control subjects were scanned with PET (15)O-water technique under 2 conditions: reading aloud English nouns and passively looking at English nouns without reading them. RESULTS: The contrast between the 2 conditions shows higher activation in Wernicke's area during the reading condition in the patient group and a reversed laterality index for the supplementary motor area in the AVH group. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide indications about the possible mechanisms of AVH. We suggest that the abnormal laterality of the supplementary motor area activity accounts for the failure to attribute speech generated by one's own brain to one's self and that the activation of Wernicke's area accounts for the perceptual nature (hearing) of the patient's experience.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".