4.5 Article

Right hemispheric participation in semantic decision improves performance

Journal

BRAIN RESEARCH
Volume 1419, Issue -, Pages 105-116

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2011.08.065

Keywords

fMRI; Language; Semantic decision; Performance; Semantic fluency; Naming

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [NIH R01 NS048281]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Functional neuroimaging studies in healthy adults demonstrate involvement of a left-lateralized network of frontal, temporal, and parietal regions during a variety of semantic processing tasks. While these areas are believed to be fundamental to semantic processing, it is unclear if task performance is correlated with differential recruitment of these or other brain regions. The objective of this study was to identify the structures underlying improved accuracy on a semantic decision task. We also investigated whether extra-scanner performance on the Boston Naming Test (BNT) and Semantic Fluency Test (SFT), neuropsychological measures of semantic retrieval, is correlated with specific areas of activation during the semantic decision/tone decision (SDTD) fMRI task. Fifty-two healthy, right-handed individuals performed a block-design SDTD task. Regression analyses revealed that increased performance on this task was associated with activation in the right inferior parietal lobule. Higher SFT performance resulted in greater recruitment of right frontal regions; improved performance on BNT was associated with more widespread activation in prefrontal, temporal, and parietal cortex bilaterally, although this activation appeared to be stronger in the right hemisphere. Overall, our results suggest that improved performance on both intra- and extra-scanner measures of semantic processing are associated with increased recruitment of right hemispheric regions. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available