4.5 Article

The role of the basal ganglia and cerebellum in language processing

期刊

BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 1133, 期 1, 页码 136-144

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.11.074

关键词

cerebellum; basal ganglia; putamen; language; phonological; dynamic causal modeling; effective connectivity; initiation; amplification; refinement

资金

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [HD042049, R01 HD042049, R56 HD042049] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDCD NIH HHS [DC06149, R21 DC006149] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NINDS NIH HHS [NS44383, NS44837, R01 NS044837] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The roles of the cerebellum and basal ganglia have typically been confined in the literature to motor planning and control. However, mounting evidence suggests that these structures are involved in more cognitive domains such as language processing. In the current study, we looked at effective connectivity (the influence that one brain region has on another) of the cerebellum and basal ganglia with regions thought to be involved in phonological processing, i.e. left inferior frontal gyrus and left lateral temporal cortex. We analyzed functional magnetic resonance imaging data (fMRI) obtained during a rhyming judgment task in adults using dynamic causal modeling (DCM). The results showed that the cerebellum has reciprocal connections with both left inferior frontal gyrus and left lateral temporal cortex, whereas the putamen has unidirectional connections into these two brain regions. Furthermore, the connections between cerebellum and these phonological processing areas were stronger than the connections between putamen and these areas. This pattern of results suggests that the putamen and cerebellum may have distinct roles in language processing. Based on research in the motor planning and control literature, we argue that the putamen engages in cortical initiation while the cerebellum amplifies and refines this signal to facilitate correct decision making. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据