The representation of speech conversations in the human auditory cortex: role of social and semantic factors.

Overview

1. The Neuro (Montreal Neurological Institute-Hospital), Mcgill University, 3801 Rue University, Montreal, QC H3A 2B4, Canada
2. Centre for Research in Brain, Language and Music (CRBLM), 2001 Av. McGill College, Montreal QC H3A 1G1, Canada
3. International Laboratory for Brain, Music and Sound Research (BRAMS), Université de Montréal, 90 Av. Vincent D'Indy, Outremont, QC H2V 2S9, Canada

Abstract

Human social nature has shaped auditory perception, as hearing is essential for navigating social interactions, especially when listening to others’ conversations. While much research has examined how the brain processes isolated words or sentences, far less is known about how broader social and semantic contexts influence speech comprehension. We used 7 T fMRI to examine neural responses while participants listened to two-speaker dialogues versus single-speaker monologues, presented either in intact or sentence-scrambled order. Twenty-four healthy young adults listened to AI-generated five-sentence conversations designed to independently manipulate social (dialogue vs. monologue) and semantic (intact vs. sentence-scrambled) contexts. Whole-brain univariate analyses revealed increased activity for scrambled compared to intact conversations in the left superior temporal sulcus (STS), consistent with predictive-coding models. Although social context alone showed no main effect, an interaction emerged: semantic disruption elicited stronger responses in dialogues than monologues within the STS. Multivariate pattern analyses further revealed higher classification accuracy of individual sentences within dialogues vs. monologues, particularly in the left anterior STS and inferior frontal gyrus, suggesting that social context enhances linguistic encoding. Together, these findings indicate that the left STS integrates both semantic and social information, supporting predictive and context-sensitive mechanisms crucial for real-world verbal communication.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Code

The paper links to its data, not to its authors' code: see the Data section.

Tracing map

A tracing map links a paper to the code its authors published: this paper has none, so it has no map.

Data

Datasets cited

• osf:vqs7h, at OSF; found in “Data availability”

Data availability

Audio stimuli, second level fMRI maps and preprocessed fMRI data are available online at https://osf.io/vqs7h/.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Versions

The history of this record: each version stored by the harvester or made by a correction of its authors or of the maintainers of its code, and what changed in its facts. The texts of the paper (its abstract, its availability statements) are not part of it; versions that changed only those are not listed.

Version 1, 30 September 2026: the first record

Recorded: type, language, journal, volume, issue, pages, dates, 2 authors, 5 keywords, 13 MeSH terms, 3 funders, 83 references.

Cite

This paper

Abassi, E., & Zatorre, R. J. (2026). The representation of speech conversations in the human auditory cortex: role of social and semantic factors. Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991), 36(3), bhag023. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhag023

Similar papers

The papers with a page that share the most with this one: the tools found in their code, their categories, datasets, cited references and authors, the rarest counting most.

[1] doi:10.1162/imag.a.1283 [code]

The language network responds robustly to sentences across tasks.

Journal: Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: fMRI, 8 references

[2] doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3003755 [code]

Action information is integrated into entorhinal representations of conceptual space and is reflected in eye movements.

Journal: PLoS biology

In common: cognitive, 11 references

[3] doi:10.1162/imag.a.1246 [code]

A 3.5-minute-long reading-based fMRI localizer for the language network.

Journal: Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: fMRI, 8 references

[4] doi:10.7554/elife.107955

Multiple event segmentation mechanisms in the human brain.

Journal: eLife

In common: 11 references

[5] doi:10.1523/eneuro.0370-25.2026 [code]

Pretraining for Large-Scale Functional Connectome Fingerprinting Supports Generalization and Transfer Learning in Functional Neuroimaging.

Journal: eNeuro

In common: fMRI, 10 references

[6] doi:10.1038/s41597-026-07323-y [code]

A densely sampled fMRI dataset for investigating food valuation.

Journal: Scientific data

In common: fMRI, 10 references

[7] doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117454 [code]

Model-based and model-free valuation signals in the human brain vary markedly in relation to individual differences in behavioral control.

Journal: Cell reports

In common: cognitive, 10 references

[8] doi:10.1038/s41467-026-76598-x

Preserved topography, lateralization, selectivity, and functional connectivity of the language network in older brains.

Journal: Nature communications

In common: fMRI, cognitive, 7 references

[9] doi:10.1038/s41467-026-71428-6 [code]

Binding items to contexts through conjunctive neural representations with the method of loci.

Journal: Nature communications

In common: 10 references

[10] doi:10.1038/s41467-026-71151-2 [code]

Common and distinct neural correlates of social interaction processing and theory of mind in narratives.

Journal: Nature communications

In common: cognitive, 9 references

Contribute

The authors of this paper can claim it, correct its record and validate its tracing map, and the maintainers of its code (its owner, or a public member of its organization) correct what it says of their repository; anyone signed in can ask for its removal. Every request goes to OSCR's own machine, which answers it; your account page follows them.

Request its removal

To ask OSCR to remove this record, the copies of its authors' scripts or its tracing map, use the removal request page: signed in, you say who you are, what to remove and why, then review and confirm the request. Published rules decide every request (how).

Discussion: questions and error reports about this paper and its code, from signed-in readers and its authors. It opens with sign-in.

Reproductions: reports from readers who ran the authors' code: what they reproduced, with which environment, commit and data. It opens with sign-in.

Activity: what happens around this paper: new versions of its record, its map's validation, discussions and reproductions. It opens with sign-in.