Peer review process
Not revised: This Reviewed Preprint includes the authors’ original preprint (without revision), an eLife assessment, and public reviews.
Read more about eLife’s peer review process.Editors
- Reviewing EditorRuth de Diego-BalaguerUniversitat de Barcelona, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain
- Senior EditorJonathan RoiserUniversity College London, London, United Kingdom
Reviewer #1 (Public Review):
The authors' aim was to test to what extent atypical organization of language is associated with a mirrored brain organization of other cognitive functions. In particular, they focused on the inferior frontal gyri (IFG) by studying the inhibitory control network. This allowed them to directly test the support for the Causal hypothesis of hemispheric specialization, arguing for fast sequences of cognitive processes being better performed by a single hemisphere, versus the Statistical hypothesis of lateralization, postulating an independent lateralization of each cognitive function.
Previous studies on this topic did not focus on functions involving homotopic language regions. This limitation is bypassed in this study by assessing inhibition with a Stop-Signal Task which also engages the IFG in the contralateral site to the verb generation task. By studying a combination of structural and functional information, in addition to the activation contrasts, the authors are able to test whether atypical organization is accompanied by stronger interhemispheric connectivity. Although relying mainly on correlations and lacking important methodological information that may be critical to understand the reported effects, the results are quite straightforward. However the bilingual/monolingual status and gender of the participants is not reported which might affect the relationship between language and inhibitory control.
The conclusions of the paper are supported by the data. With their design, the authors observed that, as a group, individuals with atypical organization show a mirror organization of the whole inhibitory network to the contralateral site, supporting the Causal hypothesis at the group level. However, individual data support the Statistical hypothesis, since the segregation between language and inhibition was not observed in all individuals and a variety of configurations in bilateral and bilateral organisation of language and inhibition were also observed.
The results of this study have important implications for our understanding of the independence between different cognitive functions which is crucial when addressing brain damage and rehabilitation. This aspect also indirectly speaks to researchers interested in evolution and in bilingualism and its relation to cognitive control. These aspects are not discussed but incorporating them would broaden the interest of the paper beyond the current implications mentioned.
Reviewer #2 (Public Review):
Language skills are traditionally associated with a network of brain regions in the left hemisphere. In this intriguing study, Esteban Villar-Rodríguez and collaborators examined if atypical hemispheric lateralization for language determines the functional and structural organisation of the network for inhibitory control as well as its relationship with schizotypy and autistic spectrum traits. The results suggest that individuals who have atypical lateralisation of the language function have also an atypical (mirrored) lateralisation of the inhibitory control network, compared to the typical group (individuals with left-lateralised language function). Furthermore, the atypical organization of language production is associated with a greater white matter volume of the corpus callosum, and atypical lateralization of inhibitory control is related to a higher interhemispheric functional coupling of the IFC, suggesting a link between atypical functional lateralisation (language and inhibitory control) and structural and functional changes in the brain.
This study also provides interesting evidence on how atypical language lateralisation impacts some aspects of language behaviour (reading), i.e., atypical lateralization predicts worse reading accuracy. Furthermore, the results suggest an association between atypical lateralization and increased schizotypy and autistic traits.
The strength of this work is that it presents a collection of measurements on the same individuals (including task-related behavioural, functional and structural neuroimaging measures) to reveal if (and how) atypical language lateralisation might be associated with: (1) atypical neural organisation of other non-linguistic cognitive systems, (2) behavioural performance associated with language tasks, and finally (3) personality traits. As such the results presented in this manuscript have the potential to be informative for various disciplines. For instance, if clarifications/corrections are provided (see below), the results might provide some insight into the role of the right hemisphere for language processing in healthy individuals as well as patient populations with acquired linguistic impairment including stroke and dementia.
One important weakness of this manuscript is that several areas, including the characteristics of participants tested, and the hypotheses/predictions, are underspecified or incomplete. Furthermore, in some cases the types of analysis do not seem to be appropriate for addressing the questions of the present study and very little explanation for those choices is provided.