Psychological bulletin最新文献

Language is a key human faculty for communication and interaction that provides invaluable insight into the human mind. Previous work has dissected different linguistic operations, but the large-scale brain networks involved in language processing are still not fully uncovered. Particularly, little is known about the subdomain-specific engagement of brain areas during semantic, syntactic, phonological, and prosodic processing and the role of subcortical and cerebellar areas. Here, we present the largest coordinate-based meta-analysis of language processing including 403 experiments. Overall, language processing primarily engaged bilateral fronto-temporal cortices, with the highest activation likelihood in the left posterior inferior frontal gyrus (IFG). Whereas we could not detect any syntax-specific regions, semantics specifically engaged left posterior temporal areas (left fusiform and occipitotemporal cortex) and the left frontal pole. Phonology showed highest subdomain-specificity in bilateral auditory and left postcentral regions, whereas prosody engaged specifically the right amygdala and the right IFG. Across all subdomains and modalities, we found strong bilateral subcortical and cerebellar contributions. Especially the right cerebellum was engaged during various processes, including speech production, visual, and phonological tasks. Collectively, our results emphasize consistent recruitment and high functional modularity for general language processing in bilateral domain-specific (temporo-frontal) and domain-general (medial frontal/anterior cingulate cortex) regions but also a high specialization of different subareas for different linguistic subdomains. Our findings refine current neurobiological models of language by adding novel insight into the general sensitivity of the language network and subdomain-specific functions of different brain areas and highlighting the role of subcortical and cerebellar regions for different language operations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

In Fenneman et al.'s (2022) review of theories and integrated impulsivity model, the authors distinguish between information impulsivity (i.e., acting without considering consequences) and temporal impulsivity (i.e., the tendency to pick sooner outcomes over later ones). The authors find that both types of impulsivity can be adaptive in different contexts. For example, when individuals experience scarcity of resources or when they are close to a minimum level of reserves (critical threshold). In this commentary, we extend their findings to a discussion about the measurement of impulsivity. We argue that a common method for measuring temporal impulsivity in which people make decisions between outcomes that are spaced out in time (intertemporal choice tasks), puts individuals in a specific context that is unlikely to generalize well to other situations. Furthermore, trait measures of impulsivity may only be modestly informative about future impulsive behavior because they largely abstract away from important context. To address these issues, we advocate for the development of dynamic measures of the two types of impulsivity. We argue that measuring temporal impulsivity in naturalistic contexts with varying environmental and state parameters could provide insights into whether individuals (i.e., humans and nonhuman animals) react to environmental changes adaptively, while trait measures of impulsivity more generally should collect and provide more contextual information. Dynamic measurement of different types of impulsivity will also allow for more discussion about adaptive impulsive responses in different contexts, which could help combat the stigmatization of various disorders associated with impulsivity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).