↓ Skip to main content

Written distractor words influence brain activity during overt picture naming

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Written distractor words influence brain activity during overt picture naming
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00167
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michele T. Diaz, Larson J. Hogstrom, Jie Zhuang, James T. Voyvodic, Micah A. Johnson, C. Christine Camblin

Abstract

Language production requires multiple stages of processing (e.g., semantic retrieval, lexical selection), each of which may involve distinct brain regions. Distractor words can be combined with picture naming to examine factors that influence language production. Phonologically-related distractors have been found to speed picture naming (facilitation), while slower response times and decreased accuracy (interference) generally occur when a distractor is categorically related to the target image. However, other types of semantically-related distractors have been reported to produce a facilitative effect (e.g., associative, part-whole). The different pattern of results for different types of semantically-related distractors raises the question about how the nature of the semantic relation influences the effect of the distractor. To explore the nature of these semantic effects further, we used functional MRI to examine the influence of four types of written distractors on brain activation during overt picture naming. Distractors began with the same sound, were categorically-related, part of the object to be named, or were unrelated to the picture. Phonologically-related trials elicited greater activation than both semantic conditions (categorically-related and part-whole) in left insula and bilateral parietal cortex, regions that have been attributed to phonological aspects of production and encoding, respectively. Semantic conditions elicited greater activation than phonological trials in left posterior MTG, a region that has been linked to concept retrieval and semantic integration. Overall, the two semantic conditions did not differ substantially in their functional activation which suggests a similarity in the semantic demands and lexical competition across these two conditions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 3%
Switzerland 1 3%
Unknown 27 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 24%
Researcher 7 24%
Student > Master 4 14%
Professor 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 38%
Neuroscience 4 14%
Linguistics 2 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 8 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 March 2014.
All research outputs
#17,716,357
of 22,749,166 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,701
of 7,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,650
of 223,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#125
of 145 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,749,166 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,136 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 223,836 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 145 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.