Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
Articles, Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive

Functional Anatomy of Language and Music Perception: Temporal and Structural Factors Investigated Using Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Corianne Rogalsky, Feng Rong, Kourosh Saberi and Gregory Hickok
Journal of Neuroscience 9 March 2011, 31 (10) 3843-3852; https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4515-10.2011
Corianne Rogalsky
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Feng Rong
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kourosh Saberi
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gregory Hickok
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Mean principal frequency component (i.e., modulation rate) of each stimulus type's acoustic envelope, within each presentation rate. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Voxels more active (p < 0.005) for sentences versus rest (red), melodies versus rest (blue), and overlap between the two (yellow). A, Across all presentation rates. B, Also across all presentation rates, but with the envelope modulation rate information included as a covariate in the regression analysis.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Voxels more active for sentences than melodies (warm colors), and more active for melodies than sentences (cool colors) with the envelope modulation rate covariate, p < 0.005.

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    Top, Voxels more active for sentences than scrambled sentences (red), and more active for melodies than rest (blue), with the envelope modulation rate covariate, p < 0.005. Bottom, Mean peak amplitudes for each stimulus type, at each presentation rate for the left anterior temporal ROI, which was more active for sentences than scrambled sentences. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    Overlap (red) of voxels passing threshold for both the sentences > scrambled sentences and for the melodies > rest repeated-measures t tests, with the envelope modulation rate covariate, p < 0.005.

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6.

    A, Voxels whose activation is sensitive to the envelope modulation rates of sentences, scrambled sentences, and melodies, respectively, p < 0.005. Voxels sensitive to both sentences' and scrambled sentences' rates are also displayed (yellow). B, Voxels whose activation is more sensitive to the envelope modulation rate of the sentences than the scrambled sentences (red) and more sensitive to the envelope modulation rate of sentences than melodies (blue), respectively, p < 0.005. Regions of overlap for the two contrasts are also displayed (yellow).

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Summary of descriptive statistics and independent-samples t test (df = 82) comparing the mean peak modulation rate of each stimulus type's acoustic envelopes

    MSDtp
    Slow (−30%) presentation rate
        Sentences0.980.59
        Melodies0.860.60
        Scrambled sentences1.520.32
        Sentences versus scrambled sentences11.6<0.00001
        Sentences versus melodies3.350.0012
    Normal rate
        Sentences1.260.78
        Melodies1.200.82
        Scrambled sentences2.130.42
        Sentences versus scrambled sentences14.1<0.00001
        Sentences versus melodies0.340.73
    Fast (+30% normal) rate
        Sentences1.600.90
        Melodies1.601.05
        Scrambled sentences2.790.52
        Sentences versus scrambled sentences12.1<0.00001
        Sentences versus melodies0.010.99
    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Talairach coordinates for voxel clusters that passed threshold (p < 0.005) for the listed contrasts, averaged across trials and subjects

    RegionBrodmann area(s)Center of massPeak t score in ROI for contrast
    xyzt scorexyz
    With no frequency covariate
        Sentences > restL STG/MTG/TTG21/22/41/42−55−1139.33−60−95
        L STG/MTG/TTG21/22−53−4494.77−57−369
        L PCG6−310303.78−31227
        L MFG9−2532254.03−213523
        R STG/MTG21/22/41/4258−1407.6559−6−4
        R MFG91832263.72293613
        Melodies > restL STG/TTG/insula/PCG13/22/40/41/42−48−19910.62−46−207
        R STG/TTG/insula/PCG13/22/40/41/4249−14512.1351−42
        Overlap of sentences > rest and melodies > restL STG/TTG22/41−51−176
        L STG22−55−3811
        R STG/TTG22/4156−165
    With frequency covariate
        Sentences > restL STG/MTG22−53−1358.7−63−194
        R STG/MTG2258−15116.560−150
        Melodies > restL insula/STG/TTG13/22/41−43−1579.92−43−3−1
        R insula/TTG/STG13/22/4146−766.845−1−4
        Overlap of sentences > rest and melodies > restL STG/TTG22/41−43−219
        R STG2249−148
        Sentences > melodiesL STG/MTG22−56−1605.7−61−131
        L STG38/22−527−34.45−529−5
        L PHG20−36−9−303.6−35−11−30
        R STG/MTG21/2257−12−24.8863−5−2
        R caudate—19−23213.7519−2523
        Melodies > sentencesL insula13−44−314.34−43−31
        L thalamus—−11−354.32−7−33
        L SFG9−2153295.05−215929
        L MFG/SFG6−2116554.86−171654
        R insula1342−2−45.8843−2−6
        R IPL/PCG4063−26224.3964−2521
        Sentences > scrambled sentencesL STG22−53−2−423.05−549−5
        L STG/MTG21/22−59−21220.59−62−175
        L STG/MTG21/22/37−55−47112.94−54−48−3
        R STG21/2246−44118.1239−4413
        R MTG2156−31−28.8856−33−3
        R STG/MTG21/2258−2−421.0665−12
        R MFG103447−48.852947−7
        Overlap of sentences > scramb. sent. and sentences > melodiesL STG22/38−537−4
        L STG22−55−50
        L STG/MTG21/22−57−214
        L MTG21−57−352
        R STG/MTG21/2253−25−2
        R STG2257−32
        R caudate—19−2424
    • STG, Superior temporal gyrus; MTG, middle temporal gyrus; TTG, transverse temporal gyrus; PCG, precentral gyrus; MFG, middle frontal gyrus; PHG, parahippocampal gyrus; SFG, superior frontal gyrus; IPL, intraparietal lobule; L, left; R, right; scramb. sent., scrambled sentences.

    • View popup
    Table 3.

    Talairach coordinates for voxel clusters that passed threshold (p < 0.005) for being significantly modulated by the envelope modulation rate of a given stimulus type, or for a contrast of modulation rate between two stimulus types

    Stimulus type(s)RegionBrodmann area(s)Center of massPeak t score in ROI for contrast
    xyzt scorexyz
    SentencesL STG/MTG22−57−1149.33−61−94
    R STG/MTG21/2257−15−27.6559−7−2
    R MFG103345103.63334310
    MelodiesL insula/STG13/22−43−526.54−45−32
    L IPL40−53−33324.92−51−3330
    L MFG9−2535264.76−273338
    L STG/MTG21/22−60−14−1−6.74−65−141
    L STG/MTG21/22−61−402−4.89−62−32−10
    L MFG10−3747−6−4.31−3747−10
    L SFG9−135732−4.05−155932
    R insula/STG13/22442−55.28454−5
    R STG38356−194.99366−19
    R STG/MTG21/2252−13−3−4.7550−20−2
    R MFG103556−3−4.335560
    R SFG107699−5.1412698
    Scrambled sentencesL STG/TTG22/42−57−898.23−56−95
    L STG/MTG22−59−3695.1−59−3411
    R STG/MTG21/2258−1516.4459−15−1
    Overlap of sentences and scramb. sent.L STG/MTG22−55−114
    R STG/MTG21/2259−152
    Sentences > melodiesL STG/MTG21/22−53−2729.23−59−132
    L STG22−537−105.32−5510−10
    L STG38−4521−164.38−4221−16
    L IFG45/44/9−5513223.78−561423
    L IFG47−422403.55−4325−1
    R STG/MTG21/2253−21−47.2959−7−1
    R STG384713−163.754715−18
    Melodies > sentencesL insula13−41−4−26.78−41−3−2
    R insula13430−27.3243−1−4
    Sentences > scramb. sent.L STG/MTG1−57−6−36.01−581−4
    L STG/MTG38−3415−315−344−29
    L SFG/MeFG10−145446.74−19544
    R STG/MTG21/384511−184.934411−17
    R MFG/SFG10184946.3621492
    R MFG83018445.31311342
    R PCG643−12293.8643−1230
    R IFG472727−48.992631−9
    Overlap of sentences > scramb. sent. and sentences >melodiesL STG/MTG21/22/38−528−9
    L STG/MTG21/22−53−10−6
    R STG/MTG21/2257−2−5
    R STG384615−18
    • MeFG, Medial frontal gyrus. Other abbreviations are as in Table 2.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Supplemental Material

    Files in this Data Supplement:

    • supplemental material - Supplemental Material
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 31 (10)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 31, Issue 10
9 Mar 2011
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Functional Anatomy of Language and Music Perception: Temporal and Structural Factors Investigated Using Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Functional Anatomy of Language and Music Perception: Temporal and Structural Factors Investigated Using Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Corianne Rogalsky, Feng Rong, Kourosh Saberi, Gregory Hickok
Journal of Neuroscience 9 March 2011, 31 (10) 3843-3852; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4515-10.2011

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
Functional Anatomy of Language and Music Perception: Temporal and Structural Factors Investigated Using Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Corianne Rogalsky, Feng Rong, Kourosh Saberi, Gregory Hickok
Journal of Neuroscience 9 March 2011, 31 (10) 3843-3852; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4515-10.2011
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Articles

  • Memory Retrieval Has a Dynamic Influence on the Maintenance Mechanisms That Are Sensitive to ζ-Inhibitory Peptide (ZIP)
  • Neurophysiological Evidence for a Cortical Contribution to the Wakefulness-Related Drive to Breathe Explaining Hypocapnia-Resistant Ventilation in Humans
  • Monomeric Alpha-Synuclein Exerts a Physiological Role on Brain ATP Synthase
Show more Articles

Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive

  • The Laminar Development of Direction Selectivity in Ferret Visual Cortex
  • Individual Differences in Amygdala-Medial Prefrontal Anatomy Link Negative Affect, Impaired Social Functioning, and Polygenic Depression Risk
  • Influence of Reward on Corticospinal Excitability during Movement Preparation
Show more Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Accessibility
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2025 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.