A Common Neural Substrate for Language Production and Verbal Working Memory

By Daniel J. Acheson, Massihullah Hamidi, Jeffrey R. Binder, Bradley R. Postle. 2011

156 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Verbal working memory (VWM), the ability to maintain and manipulate representations of speech sounds over short periods, is held by some influential models to be independent from the systems responsible for language production and comprehension [e.g., Baddeley, A. D. Working memory, thought, and action. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2007]. We explore the alternative hypothesis that maintenance in VWM is subserved by temporary activation of the language production system [Acheson, D. J., & MacDonald, M. C. Verbal working memory and language production: Common approaches to the serial ordering of verbal information. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 50–68, 2009b]. Specifically, we hypothesized that for stimuli lacking a semantic representation (e.g., nonwords such as mun), maintenance in VWM can be achieved by cycling information back and forth between the stages of phonological encoding and articulatory planning. First, fMRI was used to identify regions associated with two different stages of language production planning: the posterior superior temporal gyrus (pSTG) for phonological encoding (critical for VWM of nonwords) and the middle temporal gyrus (MTG) for lexical–semantic retrieval (not critical for VWM of nonwords). Next, in the same subjects, these regions were targeted with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) during language production and VWM task performance. Results showed that rTMS to the pSTG, but not the MTG, increased error rates on paced reading (a language production task) and on delayed serial recall of nonwords (a test of VWM). Performance on a lexical–semantic retrieval task (picture naming), in contrast, was significantly sensitive to rTMS of the MTG. Because rTMS was guided by language production-related activity, these results provide the first causal evidence that maintenance in VWM directly depends on the long-term representations and processes used in speech production.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Social Psychology, Neuroscience

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Social Psychology

In Neuroscience

Citations in the corpus

Inner Speech: Development, Cognitive Functions, Phenomenology, and Neurobiology (2015, background): “…verbal working memory maintenance (Fegen, Buchsbaum, & D’Esposito, 2015), while disruption to posterior superior temporal gyrus using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation interferes with both speech production and verbal working memory maintenance (Acheson, Hamidi, Binder, & Postle, 2011).”
The effect of rehearsal rate and memory load on verbal working memory (2015, unknown): “P A A uthor M anuscript rehearsal rate suggest the same neural mechanisms might be engaged in speech production and verbal WM (Acheson et al., 2011; Acheson & MacDonald, 2009).”
The cortical dynamics of speaking: present shortcomings and future avenues (2016, methodology): “…et al., 2009; Laganaro, Morand, Schwitter, et al., 2009; Papoutsi et al., 2009; Sahin et al., 2009), ideally, in a setting where immediate and overt naming is required (e.g. Acheson et al., 2011; Laganaro et al., 2013; Miozzo et al., 2014; Schuhmann et al., 2012; Strijkers et al., under review).”
The Spatial and Temporal Signatures of Word Production Components: A Critical Update (2011, background): “Acheson et al. (2011) found a significant facilitating TMS effect on response latencies when the left mid MTG but not when the left posterior STG was stimulated between 100 ms before and 200 ms after picture onset.”