2003
DOI: 10.1016/s1053-8119(03)00353-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differences between auditory evoked responses recorded during spatial and nonspatial working memory tasks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
21
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
2
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This result indicates that the load demand imposed on the neural system was supported by both domain-specific and domain-general networks rather than either one of the networks. These findings enrich existing knowledge regarding load-related BOLD activity for auditory working memory and extend beyond Anourova et al's (2003) event-related potential study which suggested that maintenance of auditory information under high load situation might be dependent upon a common nonspecific neuronal network. Second, more importantly, our study demonstrated loaddependent and domain-specific modulation within the right IPL.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…This result indicates that the load demand imposed on the neural system was supported by both domain-specific and domain-general networks rather than either one of the networks. These findings enrich existing knowledge regarding load-related BOLD activity for auditory working memory and extend beyond Anourova et al's (2003) event-related potential study which suggested that maintenance of auditory information under high load situation might be dependent upon a common nonspecific neuronal network. Second, more importantly, our study demonstrated loaddependent and domain-specific modulation within the right IPL.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…However, both tasks appear to recruit the same, or similar, cortical regions since differences were mainly evident in regions common to both tasks. This supports the idea that WM processes, regardless of their complexity, stem from a common network (e.g., Anurova et al, 2003;Cabeza and Nyberg, 2000;Linden, 2007). It is also possible that some of the regions within this network may assume further roles, e.g., aiding in the storage and retrieval of items to and from LTM as task complexity and interference increase.…”
Section: Differences In Cortical Activation Between Cwms and Tnwm Taskssupporting
confidence: 74%
“…Source localization identified two dissociable processing networks, with a dorsal stream (involving parietal areas) showing activation approximately 90 ms after stimulus onset which decreased gradually, and a ventral stream (involving anterior temporal regions) which emerged at approximately 100 ms and which rapidly peaked and dissipated (see also Ahveninen et al, 2006;Anourova et al, 2001; De Santis, Clarke, & Murry, 2007). In contrast to these early temporal dissociations, studies have also identified very late task-related effects occurring 200-400 ms after stimulus onset (Alain et al, 2001(Alain et al, , 2009Anurova et al, 2003). In an fMRI/EEG study using a delayed matchingto-sample task, Alain et al (2001) found dissociable dorsal (superior/middle frontal, parietal, posterior temporal) and ventral (inferior frontal, and superior temporal) brain networks for spatial processing and auditory identification, respectively.…”
Section: When Could Dorsal-ventral Interaction Take Place?mentioning
confidence: 99%