The role of the right hemisphere in metaphor comprehension: A meta-analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging studies

Human Brain Mapping

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 107-122

  Yang, Jie ^a  

^a WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Activation likelihood estimation; Conventionality; Functional magnetic resonance imaging; Metaphor; Right hemisphere; Sentential context; Task demand

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; DECISION MAKING; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; HUMAN; INFERIOR FRONTAL GYRUS; INSULA; MENTAL TASK; META ANALYSIS; MIDDLE FRONTAL GYRUS; MIDDLE TEMPORAL GYRUS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RIGHT HEMISPHERE; SEMANTICS; SUPERIOR TEMPORAL GYRUS;

ACTIVATION LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION; CONVENTIONALITY; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; METAPHOR; RIGHT HEMISPHERE; SENTENTIAL CONTEXT; TASK DEMAND;

BRAIN; COMPREHENSION; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; METAPHOR; SEMANTICS;

EID: 84889665459     PISSN: 10659471     EISSN: 10970193     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hbm.22160     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Adams RB, Janata P (2002): A comparison of neural circuits underlying auditory and visual object categorization. Neuroimage 16:361-377.
2. Ahrens K, Liu HL, Lee CY, Gong SP, Fang SY, Hsu YY (2007): Functional MRI of conventional and anomalous metaphors in Mandarin Chinese. Brain Lang 100:163-171.
3. Anaki D, Faust M, Kravetz S (1998): Cerebral hemispheric asymmetries in processing lexical metaphors. Neuropsychologia 36:353-362.
4. Bambini V, Gentili C, Ricciardi E, Bertinetto PM, Pietrini P (2011): Decomposing metaphor processing at the cognitive and neural level through functional magnetic resonance imaging. Brain Res Bull 86:203-216.
5. Beeman M (1993): Semantic processing in the right hemisphere may contribute to drawing inferences from discourse. Brain Lang 44:80-120.
6. Beeman M (1998): Coarse semantic coding and discourse comprehension. In: Beeman M, Chiarello C, editors. Right Hemisphere Language Comprehension: Perspectives from Cognitive Neuroscience.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum. pp255-284.
7. Beeman M, Friedman RB, Grafman J, Perez E, Diamond S, Lindsay MB (1994): Summation priming and coarse semantic coding in the right hemisphere. J Cogn Neurosci 6:26-45.
8. Beeman M, Bowden EM, Gernsbacher MA (2000): Right and left hemisphere cooperation for drawing predictive and coherence inferences during normal story comprehension. Brain Lang 71:310-336.
9. Ben Shachar M, Palti D, Grodzinsky Y (2004): Neural correlates of syntactic movement: converging evidence from two fMRI experiments. Neuroimage 21:1320-1336.
10. Bihrle AM, Brownell HH, Powelson JA, Gardner H (1986): Comprehension of humorous and nonhumorous materials by left and right brain-damaged patients. Brain Cogn 5:399-311.
11. Booth JR, Burman DD, Meyer JR, Gitelman DR, Parrish TB, Mesulam MM (2002): Modality independence of word comprehension. Hum Brain Mapp 16:251-261.
12. Bottini G, Corcoran R, Sterzi R, Paulesu E, Schenone P, Scarpa P, Frackowiak RS, Frith CD (1994): The role of the right hemisphere in the interpretation of figurative aspects of language. A positron emission tomography activation study. Brain 117:1241-1253.
13. Brownell HH, Potter HH, Michelow D, Gardner H (1984): Sensitivity to lexical denotation and connotation in brain-damaged patients: a double dissociation. Brain Lang 22:253-265.
14. Brownell HH, Simpson TL, Bihrle AM, Potter HH, Gardner H (1990): Appreciation of metaphoric alternative word meanings by left and right brain damaged patients. Neuropsychologia 28:375-393.
15. Chen E, Widick P, Chatterjee A (2008): Functional-anatomical organization of predicate metaphor processing. Brain Lang 107:194-202.
16. Constable RT, Pugh KR, Berroya E, Mencl WE, Westerveld M, Ni W, Shankweiler D (2004): Sentence complexity and input modality effects in sentence comprehension: An fMRI study. Neuroimage 22:11-21.
17. Diaz MT, Hogstrom LJ (2011): The influence of context on hemispheric recruitment during metaphor processing. J Cogn Neurosci 23:3586-3597.
18. Diaz MT, Barrett KT, Hogstrom LJ (2011): The influence of sentence novelty and figurativeness on brain activity. Neuropsychologia 49:320-330.
19. Eickhoff SB, Laird AR, Grefkes C, Wang LE, Zilles K, Fox PT (2009): Coordinate-based activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis of neuroimaging data: A random-effects approach based on empirical estimates of spatial uncertainty. Hum Brain Mapp 309:2907-2926.
20. Eviatar Z, Just MA (2006): Brain correlates of discourse processing: An fMRI investigation of irony and conventional metaphor comprehension. Neuropsychologia 44:2348-2359.
21. Faust M, Mashal N (2007): The role of the right cerebral hemisphere in processing novel metaphoric expressions taken from poetry: a divided visual field study. Neuropsychologia 45:860-870.
22. Faust M, Babkoff H, Kravetz S (1995): Linguistic processes in the two cerebral hemispheres: Implications for modularity vs interactionism. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 17:171-192.
23. Faust M, Bar-lev A, Chiarell C (2003): Sentence priming effects in the two cerebral hemispheres: Influences of lexical relatedness, word order, and sentence anomaly. Neuropsychologia 41:480-492.
24. Federmeier KD (2007): Thinking ahead: The role and roots of prediction in language comprehension. Psychophysiology 44:491-505.
25. Giora R (1997): Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cogn Linguist 7:183-206.
26. Giora R (1999): On the priority of salient meanings: Studies of literal and figurative language. J Pragm 31:919-929.
27. Giora R (2002): Literal vs. figurative language: Different or equal?J Pragm 34:487-506.
28. Giora R (2003): On Our Mind: Salience, Context and Figurative Language.New York:Oxford University Press.
29. Giora R, Fein O (1999): On understanding familiar and less familiar figurative language. J Pragm 31:1601-1618.
30. Giora R, Zaidel E, Soroker N, Batori G, Kasher A (2000): Differential effects of right- and left-hemisphere damage on understanding sarcasm and metaphor. Metaphor Symb 15:63-83.
31. Grindrod CM, Baum SR (2003): Sensitivity to local sentence context information in lexical ambiguity resolution: evidence from left- and right-hemisphere-damaged individuals. Brain Lang 85:503-523.
32. Gurd JM, Amunts K, Weiss PH, Zafiris O, Zilles K, Marshall JC, Fink GR (2002): Posterior parietal cortex is implicated in continuous switching between verbal fluency tasks: An fMRI study with clinical implications. Brain 125:1024-1038.
33. Jancke L, Shah NJ (2002): Does dichotic listening probe temporal lobe functions?Neurology 58:736-743.
34. Jung-Beeman M (2005): Bilateral brain processes for comprehending natural language. Trends Cogn Sci 9:712-718.
35. Kaplan JA, Brownell HH, Jacobs JR, Gardner H (1990): The effects of right hemisphere damage on the pragmatic interpretation of conversational remarks. Brain Lang 38:315-333.
36. Kircher TT, Brammer M, Tous AN, Williams SC, McGuire PK (2001): Engagement of right temporal cortex during processing of linguistic context. Neuropsychologia 39:798-809.
37. Kircher TT, Leube DT, Erb M, Grodd W, Rapp AM (2007): Neural correlates of metaphor processing in schizophrenia. Neuroimage 34:281-289.
38. Kosslyn SM, Alpert NM, Thompson WL, Chabris CF, Rauch SL, Anderson AK (1994): Identifying objects from different viewpoints. A PET investigation. Brain 117:1055-1071.
39. Laird AR, Fox M, Price CJ, Glahn DC, Uecker AM, Lancaster JL, Turkeltaub PE, Kochunov P, Fox PT (2005): ALE meta-analysis: controlling the false discovery rate and performing statistical contrasts. Hum Brain Mapp 25:155-164.
40. Lakoff G, Johnson M (1980): Metaphors We Live By.Chicago:Univ. Chicago Press.
41. Lancaster JL, Tordesillas-Gutierrez D, Martinez M, Salinas F, Evans A, Zilles K, Mazziotta JC, Fox PT (2007): Bias between MNI and Talairach coordinates analyzed using the ICBM-152 template. Hum Brain Mapp 28:1194-1205.
42. Lee SS, Dapretto M (2006): Metaphorical vs. literal word meanings: fMRI evidence against a selective role of the right hemisphere. Neuroimage 292:536-544.
43. MacKenzie C, Begg T, Brady M, Lees KR (1997): The effects on verbal communication skills of right hemisphere stroke in middle age. Aphasiology 11:929-945.
44. Mashal N, Faust M (2008): Right hemisphere sensitivity to novel metaphoric relations: Application of the signal detection theory. Brain Lang 104:103-112.
45. Mashal N, Faust M (2009): Conventionalization of novel metaphors: A shift in hemispheric asymmetry. Laterality 14:573-589.
46. Mashal N, Faust M, Hendler T (2005): The role of the right hemisphere in processing nonsalient metaphorical meanings: Application of principal components analysis to fMRI data. Neuropsychologia 43:2084-2100.
47. Mashal N, Faust M, Hendler T, Jung-Beeman M (2007): An fMRI investigation of the neural correlates underlying the processing of novel metaphoric expressions. Brain Lang 100:115-126.
48. Mashal N, Faust M, Hendler T, Jung-Beeman M (2008): Hemispheric differences in processing the literal interpretation of idioms: Converging evidence from behavioral and fMRI studies. Cortex 44:848-860.
49. Mashal N, Faust M, Hendler T, Jung-Beeman M (2009): An fMRI study of processing novel metaphoric sentences. Laterality 14:30-54.
50. Mason RA, Just MA (2004): How the brain processes causal inferences in text: A theoretical account of generation and integration component processes utilizing both cerebral hemispheres. Psychol Sci 15:1-7.
51. McDermott KB, Petersen SE, Watson JM, Ojemann JG (2003): A procedure for identifying regions preferentially activated by attention to semantic and phonological relations using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Neuropsychologia 41:293-303.
52. Milham MP, Banich MT, Webb A, Barad V, Cohen NJ, Wszalek T, Kramer AF (2001): The relative involvement of anterior cingulate and prefrontal cortex in attentional control depends on nature of conflict. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 12:467-473.
53. Nichelli P, Grafman J, Pietrini P, Clark K, Lee KY, Miletich R (1995): Where the brain appreciates the moral of a story. Neuroreport 6:2309-2313.
54. Petersen SE, Fox PT, Posner MI, Mintun M, Rauchle ME (1989): Positron emission tomography studies of the processing of single words. J Cogn Neurosci 1:153-170.
55. Pobric G, Mashal N, Faust M, Lavidor M (2008): The role of the right cerebral hemisphere in processing novel metaphoric expressions: A transcranial magnetic stimulation study. J Cogn Neurosci 20:170-181.
56. Poeppel D, Guillemin A, Thompson J, Fritz J, Bavelier D, Braun AR (2004): Auditory lexical decision, categorical perception, and FM direction discrimination differentially engage left and right auditory cortex. Neuropsychologia 42:183-200.
57. Rapp AM, Leube DT, Erb M, Grodd W, Kircher TT (2004): Neural correlates of metaphor processing. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 203:395-402.
58. Rapp AM, Leube DT, Erb M, Grodd W, Kircher TT (2007): Laterality in metaphor processing: Lack of evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging for the right hemisphere theory. Brain Lang 100:142-149.
59. Schmidt GL, Seger CA (2009): Neural correlates of metaphor processing: The roles of figurativeness, familiarity and difficulty. Brain Cogn 71:375-386.
60. Seger CA, Desmond JE, Glover GH, Gabrieli JD (2000): Functional magnetic resonance imaging evidence for right-hemisphere involvement in processing unusual semantic relationships. Neuropsychology 14:361-369.
61. Shibata M, Abe J, Terao A, Miyamoto T (2007): Neural mechanisms involved in the comprehension of metaphoric and literal sentences: An fMRI study. Brain Res 1166:92-102.
62. Sotillo M, Carreti L, Hinojosa JA, Tapia M, Mercado F, Lopez-Martin S, Albert J (2005): Neural activity associated with metaphor comprehension: Spatial analysis. Neurosci Lett 373:5-9.
63. St George M, Kutas M, Martinez A, Sereno MI (1999): Semantic integration in reading: Engagement of the right hemisphere during discourse processing. Brain 122:1317-1325.
64. Stringaris AK, Medford NC, Giora R, Giampietro V, Brammer MJ, David AS (2006): How metaphors influence semantic relatedness judgments: The role of the right frontal cortex. Neuroimage 33:784-793.
65. Stringaris AK, Medford NC, Giampietro V, Brammer MJ, David AS (2007): Deriving meaning: Distinct neural mechanisms for metaphoric, literal, and non-meaningful sentences. Brain Lang 100:150-162.
66. Talairach J, Tournoux P (1988): Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain.New York:Thieme Medical.
67. Uchiyama HT, Saito DN, Tanabe HC, Harada T, Seki A, Ohno K, Koeda T, Sadato N (2012): Distinction between the literal and intended meanings of sentences: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study of metaphor and sarcasm. Cortex 48:563-583.
68. Vigneau M, Beaucousin V, Hervé PY, Jobard G, Petit L, Crivello F, Mellet E, Zago L, Mazoyer B, Tzourio-Mazoyer N (2011): What is right-hemisphere contribution to phonological, lexico-semantic, and sentence processing? Insights from a meta-analysis. Neuroimage 54:577-593.
69. Warburton EA, Wise RJS, Price CJ, Weiller C, Hadar U, Ramsay S, Frackowiak RSJ, (1996): Noun and verb retrieval by normal subjects. Studies with PET. Brain 119:159-179.
70. Winner E, Gardner H (1977): The comprehension of metaphor in brain-damaged patients. Brain 100:717-729.
71. Xu J, Kemeny S, Park G, Frattali C, Braun A (2005): Language in context: Emergent features of word, sentence, and narrative comprehension. Neuroimage 25:1002-1015.
72. Yang FG, Edens J, Simpson C, Krawczyk DC (2009): Differences in task demands influence the hemispheric lateralization and neural correlates of metaphor. Brain Lang 111:114-124.
73. Yang FG, Fuller J, Khodaparast N, Krawczyk DC (2010): Figurative language processing after traumatic brain injury in adults: A preliminary study. Neuropsychologia 48:1923-1929.