title: Engaged listeners: shared neural processing of powerful political speeches.
abstract: Powerful speeches can captivate audiences, whereas weaker speeches fail to engage their listeners. What is happening in the brains of a captivated audience? Here, we assess audience-wide functional brain dynamics during listening to speeches of varying rhetorical quality. The speeches were given by German politicians and evaluated as rhetorically powerful or weak. Listening to each of the speeches induced similar neural response time courses, as measured by inter-subject correlation analysis, in widespread brain regions involved in spoken language processing. Crucially, alignment of the time course across listeners was stronger for rhetorically powerful speeches, especially for bilateral regions of the superior temporal gyri and medial prefrontal cortex. Thus, during powerful speeches, listeners as a group are more coupled to each other, suggesting that powerful speeches are more potent in taking control of the listeners' brain responses. Weaker speeches were processed more heterogeneously, although they still prompted substantially correlated responses. These patterns of coupled neural responses bear resemblance to metaphors of resonance, which are often invoked in discussions of speech impact, and contribute to the literature on auditory attention under natural circumstances. Overall, this approach opens up possibilities for research on the neural mechanisms mediating the reception of entertaining or persuasive messages.
authors: Department of Psychology, University of Konstanz, Baden-Württemberg, Germany, ralf.schmaelzle@uni-konstanz.de.
authors: Ralf
authors: R
authors: Schmälzle
authors: Department of Psychology, University of Konstanz, Baden-Württemberg, Germany.
authors: Frank E K
authors: FE
authors: Häcker
authors: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, and.
authors: Christopher J
authors: CJ
authors: Honey
authors: Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA.
authors: Uri
authors: U
authors: Hasson
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D001288:Attention / Q000502:physiology; D001921:Brain / Q000502:physiology*; D001931:Brain Mapping; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging; D008297:Male; D010565:Persuasive Communication; D011057:Politics; D013702:Temporal Lobe / Q000502:physiology; D055815:Young Adult
keywords: fMRI; inter-subject correlation; listening; rhetoric; speech
references: J Neurosci. 2013 Oct 2;33(40):15978-88
references: 24089502
references: Psychol Sci. 2007 Jun;18(6):475-80
references: 17576257
references: Neuroimage. 2014 Nov 15;102 Pt 2:498-509
references: 25128711
references: Hear Res. 2014 Jan;307:29-41
references: 23938208
references: Cereb Cortex. 2008 Jan;18(1):230-42
references: 17504783
references: Cereb Cortex. 2012 Jan;22(1):191-200
references: 21625012
references: J Neurosci. 2010 Jun 23;30(25):8421-4
references: 20573889
references: J Neurosci. 2012 Oct 31;32(44):15277-83
references: 23115166
references: J Neurosci. 2011 Feb 23;31(8):2906-15
references: 21414912
references: Nat Neurosci. 2011 Apr;14(4):426-7
references: 21358641
references: Neuroimage. 2013 Aug 1;76:412-27
references: 23507394
references: Nat Neurosci. 2005 Feb;8(2):145-6
references: 15665880
references: Neuroimage. 2005 Nov 15;28(3):635-62
references: 16172003
references: J Neurosci. 2013 Jun 19;33(25):10340-7
references: 23785147
references: PLoS One. 2013;8(5):e64489
references: 23734202
references: Open Neuroimag J. 2008;2:14-9
references: 19018313
references: J Neurosci. 1997 Jan 1;17(1):353-62
references: 8987760
references: Psychol Sci. 2012 May 1;23(5):439-45
references: 22510393
references: J Neurosci. 2006 Dec 13;26(50):13067-75
references: 17167096
references: Psychol Sci. 2009 Sep;20(9):1092-9
references: 19656340
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Aug 10;107(32):14425-30
references: 20660768
references: Prog Brain Res. 2006;156:31-51
references: 17015073
references: Hear Res. 2014 Jan;307:111-20
references: 23850664
references: Nat Commun. 2014;5:4567
references: 25072833
references: Nat Methods. 2011 Aug;8(8):665-70
references: 21706013
references: Neuroimage. 2012 Oct 15;63(1):501-6
references: 22813575
references: Magn Reson Med. 1999 Nov;42(5):952-62
references: 10542355
references: Nat Rev Neurosci. 2007 May;8(5):393-402
references: 17431404
references: Nat Rev Neurosci. 2006 Apr;7(4):268-77
references: 16552413
references: Neuroimage. 1996 Dec;4(3 Pt 1):159-73
references: 9345506
references: Science. 2004 Mar 12;303(5664):1634-40
references: 15016991
references: Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2011 Jan;6(1):109-18
references: 20212003
references: Trends Cogn Sci. 2012 Feb;16(2):114-21
references: 22221820
references: Front Syst Neurosci. 2008 Nov 24;2:4
references: 19104670
references: Hum Brain Mapp. 2000 Jul;10(3):120-31
references: 10912591
references: Nature. 2012 May 10;485(7397):233-6
references: 22522927
references: Hear Res. 2014 Jan;307:121-35
references: 24113115
references: Brain Lang. 2012 Feb;120(2):163-73
references: 20472279
references: Trends Cogn Sci. 2010 Jan;14(1):40-8
references: 20004608
references: Hum Brain Mapp. 2008 May;29(5):581-93
references: 17557297
references: Annu Rev Psychol. 2011;62:103-34
references: 21126178
references: PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e41196
references: 22924089
references: J Cogn Neurosci. 2009 Mar;21(3):489-510
references: 18510452
references: Nat Neurosci. 2004 Jun;7(6):658-63
references: 15156150
references: Front Hum Neurosci. 2012 Nov 26;6:313
references: 23189049
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 May 18;107(20):9388-93
references: 20439736
references: Neuroimage. 2012 Aug 15;62(2):816-47
references: 22584224
references: Hear Res. 2013 Nov;305:10-8
references: 23981812
references: Psychophysiology. 2009 Jan;46(1):1-11
references: 18778317
references: Neuroimage. 2011 Oct 1;58(3):963-73
references: 21749924