The left inferior frontal gyrus and the resolution of unimodal vs. cross-modal interference in speech production: A transcranial direct current stimulation study
E. Ward , H.S. Gauvin , K.L. McMahon , M. Meinzer , G.I. de Zubicaray
{"title":"The left inferior frontal gyrus and the resolution of unimodal vs. cross-modal interference in speech production: A transcranial direct current stimulation study","authors":"E. Ward , H.S. Gauvin , K.L. McMahon , M. Meinzer , G.I. de Zubicaray","doi":"10.1016/j.jneuroling.2022.101097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Most neurobiological models of spoken word production propose that multiple lexical candidates are activated in left posterior temporal cortex during word retrieval. Some accounts also propose a role for the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG) in selecting the correct word from among these candidates. Evidence for both proposals has come from the picture-word interference (PWI) paradigm, in which participants name pictures (e.g., RABBIT) while ignoring a distractor word. Categorically related distractors (e.g., </span><em>horse</em>-RABBIT) slow naming latencies compared to unrelated words (e.g., <em>violin</em>-RABBIT), an effect known as semantic interference, whereas congruent distractors (e.g., <em>rabbit</em><span>-RABBIT) facilitate naming, but the precise conditions in which these effects occur remain a matter of debate. Although the neuroimaging evidence for left temporal cortex engagement in this paradigm is robust, the evidence for LIFG involvement is more equivocal, particularly for semantic interference. A key factor distinguishing LIFG involvement in neuroimaging studies is </span><em>distractor modality</em><span>, i.e., activity is more consistently reported for auditory distractors. We therefore applied online anodal transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (atDCS) to LIFG and left posterior temporal cortex in a three-way, cross-over, sham-controlled PWI paradigm involving either written (Experiment 1) or auditory (Experiment 2) distractors. Surprisingly, compared to sham, atDCS over posterior temporal cortex significantly slowed the congruent facilitation effect with written distractors, but did not modulate the semantic interference effect, while atDCS to LIFG did not significantly influence either effect. We also failed to observe any significant modulatory effects of atDCS with auditory distractors. The present results only partially support left temporal lobe engagement during PWI and provide no evidence for LIFG involvement. We recommend future PWI studies systematically investigate different electrode montages in tDCS protocols.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":50118,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neurolinguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neurolinguistics","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0911604422000410","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Most neurobiological models of spoken word production propose that multiple lexical candidates are activated in left posterior temporal cortex during word retrieval. Some accounts also propose a role for the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG) in selecting the correct word from among these candidates. Evidence for both proposals has come from the picture-word interference (PWI) paradigm, in which participants name pictures (e.g., RABBIT) while ignoring a distractor word. Categorically related distractors (e.g., horse-RABBIT) slow naming latencies compared to unrelated words (e.g., violin-RABBIT), an effect known as semantic interference, whereas congruent distractors (e.g., rabbit-RABBIT) facilitate naming, but the precise conditions in which these effects occur remain a matter of debate. Although the neuroimaging evidence for left temporal cortex engagement in this paradigm is robust, the evidence for LIFG involvement is more equivocal, particularly for semantic interference. A key factor distinguishing LIFG involvement in neuroimaging studies is distractor modality, i.e., activity is more consistently reported for auditory distractors. We therefore applied online anodal transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (atDCS) to LIFG and left posterior temporal cortex in a three-way, cross-over, sham-controlled PWI paradigm involving either written (Experiment 1) or auditory (Experiment 2) distractors. Surprisingly, compared to sham, atDCS over posterior temporal cortex significantly slowed the congruent facilitation effect with written distractors, but did not modulate the semantic interference effect, while atDCS to LIFG did not significantly influence either effect. We also failed to observe any significant modulatory effects of atDCS with auditory distractors. The present results only partially support left temporal lobe engagement during PWI and provide no evidence for LIFG involvement. We recommend future PWI studies systematically investigate different electrode montages in tDCS protocols.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Neurolinguistics is an international forum for the integration of the neurosciences and language sciences. JNL provides for rapid publication of novel, peer-reviewed research into the interaction between language, communication and brain processes. The focus is on rigorous studies of an empirical or theoretical nature and which make an original contribution to our knowledge about the involvement of the nervous system in communication and its breakdowns. Contributions from neurology, communication disorders, linguistics, neuropsychology and cognitive science in general are welcome. Published articles will typically address issues relating some aspect of language or speech function to its neurological substrates with clear theoretical import. Interdisciplinary work on any aspect of the biological foundations of language and its disorders resulting from brain damage is encouraged. Studies of normal subjects, with clear reference to brain functions, are appropriate. Group-studies on well defined samples and case studies with well documented lesion or nervous system dysfunction are acceptable. The journal is open to empirical reports and review articles. Special issues on aspects of the relation between language and the structure and function of the nervous system are also welcome.