Sensitivity to local sentence context information in lexical ambiguity resolution: Evidence from left- and right-hemisphere-damaged individuals

Brain and Language

Volumn 85, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 503-523

  Grindrod, Christopher M ^a   Baum, Shari R ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Context effects; Laterality; Lexical ambiguity resolution; Nonfluent aphasia; Right hemisphere damage; Semantic priming

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; APHASIA; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; BRAIN INJURY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LEFT HEMISPHERE; MALE; RIGHT HEMISPHERE; SEMANTICS; VISUAL STIMULATION; WORD RECOGNITION;

EID: 0038028665     PISSN: 0093934X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00072-5     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Atchley R.A., Burgess C., Audet C., Arambel S. Timecourse, context effects and the processing of lexical ambiguity in the cerebral hemispheres. Brain and Cognition. 30:1996;277-280.
2. Atchley R.A., Keeney M., Burgess C. Cerebral hemispheric mechanisms linking ambiguous word meaning retrieval and creativity. Brain and Cognition. 40:1999;479-499.
3. Beeman M.J. Semantic processing in the right hemisphere may contribute to drawing inferences from discourse. Brain and Language. 44:1993;80-120.
4. Beeman M.J. Coarse semantic coding and discourse comprehension. Beeman M.J., Chiarello C. Right hemisphere language comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience. 1998;255-284 Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
5. Beeman M.J., Friedman R.B., Grafman J., Perez E., Diamond S., Lindsay M.B. Summation priming and coarse semantic coding in the right hemisphere. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 6:1994;26-45.
6. Bihrle A.M., Brownell H.H., Powelson J., Gardner H. Comprehension of humorous and nonhumorous materials by brain-damaged patients. Brain and Cognition. 5:1986;399-411.
7. Binder K.S., Morris R.K. Eye movements and lexical ambiguity resolution: Effects of prior encounter and discourse topic. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition. 21:1995;1186-1196.
8. Binder K.S., Rayner K. Contextual strength does not modulate the subordinate bias effect: Evidence from eye fixations and self-paced reading. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. 5:1998;271-276.
9. Brownell H.H., Potter H.H., Bihrle A.M., Gardner H. Inference deficits in right brain-damaged patients. Brain and Language. 27:1986;310-321.
10. Brownell H.H., Potter H.H., Michelow D., Gardner H. Sensitivity to lexical denotation and connotation in brain-damaged patients: A double dissociation? Brain and Language. 22:1984;253-265.
11. Brownell H.H., Simpson T.L., Bihrle A.M., Potter H.H., Gardner H. Appreciation of metaphoric alternative word meanings by left and right brain-damaged patients. Neuropsychologia. 28:1990;375-383.
12. Burgess C., Simpson G.B. Cerebral hemispheric mechanisms in the retrieval of ambiguous word meanings. Brain and Language. 33:1988;86-103.
13. Caplan D. Language: Structure, process and disorders. 1992;MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
14. Chiarello C. On codes of meaning and the meaning of codes: Semantic access and retrieval within and between hemispheres. Beeman M.J., Chiarello C. Right hemisphere language comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience. 1998;141-160 Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
15. Chiarello C., Liu S., Faust M. Bihemispheric sensitivity to sentence anomaly. Neuropsychologia. 39:2001;1451-1463.
16. Collins M. Interhemispheric communication via direct connections for alternative meanings of ambiguous words. Brain and Language. 80:2002;77-96.
17. Coney J., Evans K.D. Hemispheric asymmetries in the resolution of lexical ambiguity. Neuropsychologia. 38:2000;272-282.
18. Cook N.D. Toward a central dogma for psychology. New Ideas in Psychology. 7:1989;1-18.
19. Cook N.D., Beech A.R. The cerebral hemispheres and bilateral neural nets. International Journal of Neuroscience. 52:1990;201-210.
20. Dopkins S., Morris R.K., Rayner K. Lexical ambiguity and eye fixations in reading: A test of competing models of lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language. 31:1992;461-476.
21. Duffy S.A., Morris R.K., Rayner K. Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of Memory and Language. 27:1988;429-446.
22. Fassbinder W., Tompkins C.A. Slowed lexical-semantic activation in individuals with right hemisphere brain damage? Aphasiology. 15:2001;1079-1090.
23. Faust M. Obtaining evidence of language comprehension from sentence priming. Beeman M.J., Chiarello C. Right hemisphere language comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience. 1998;161-185 Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
24. Faust M., Babkoff H., Kravetz S. Linguistic processes in the two cerebral hemispheres: Implications for modularity vs. interactionism. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology. 17:1995;171-192.
25. Faust M., Chiarello C. Constraints on sentence priming in the cerebral hemispheres: Effects of intervening words in sentences and lists. Brain and Language. 63:1998;219-236.
26. Faust M., Chiarello C. Sentence context and lexical ambiguity resolution by the two hemispheres. Neuropsychologia. 36:1998;827-835.
27. Faust M., Kravetz S. Levels of sentence constraint and lexical decision in the two hemispheres. Brain and Language. 62:1998;149-162.
28. Faust M., Kravetz S., Babkoff H. Hemisphericity and top-down processing of language. Brain and Language. 44:1993;1-18.
29. Faust M.E., Gernsbacher M.A. Cerebral mechanisms for suppression of inappropriate information during sentence comprehension. Brain and Language. 53:1996;234-259.
30. Folstein M.F., Folstein S.E., McHugh P.R. "Mini-mental state": A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research. 12:1975;189-198.
31. Francis W., Kucera H. Frequency analysis of English usage. 1982;Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.
32. Gardner H., Brownell H.H., Wapner W., Michelow D. Missing the point: The role of the right hemisphere in processing complex linguistic materials. Perecman E. Cognitive processing in the right hemisphere. 1983;169-191 Academic Press, New York.
33. Goodglass H., Kaplan E. The assessment of aphasia and related disorders. 1983;Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia, PA.
34. Haarmann H.J., Kolk H.H. On-line sensitivity to subject-verb agreement violations in Broca's aphasics: The role of syntactic complexity and time. Brain and Language. 46:1994;493-516.
35. Hagoort, P. (1990). Tracking the time course of language understanding in aphasia. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
36. Hasbrooke R.E., Chiarello C. Bihemispheric processing of redundant bilateral lexical information. Neuropsychology. 12:1998;78-94.
37. Joanette Y., Goulet P., Hannequin D. Right hemisphere and verbal communication. 1990;Springer, New York.
38. Kaplan E., Goodglass H., Weintraub S. Boston naming test. 1983;Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia, PA.
39. Kolk H.H. A time-based approach to agrammatic production. Brain and Language. 50:1995;282-303.
40. Kolk H.H., Van Grunsven M.M. Agrammatism as a variable phenomenon. Cognitive Neuropsychology. 2:1985;347-384.
41. Lehman M.T., Tompkins C.A. Inferencing in adults with right hemisphere brain damage: An analysis of conflicting results. Aphasiology. 14:2000;485-499.
42. Leonard C.L., Baum S.R. On-line evidence for context use by right-brain-damaged patients. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 10:1998;499-508.
43. Leonard C.L., Waters G.S., Caplan D. The use of contextual information by right brain-damaged individuals in the resolution of ambiguous pronouns. Brain and Language. 57:1997;309-342.
44. Leonard C.L., Waters G.S., Caplan D. The use of contextual information related to general world knowledge by right brain-damaged individuals in pronoun resolution. Brain and Language. 57:1997;343-359.
45. Martin C., Vu H., Kellas G., Metcalf K. Strength of discourse context as a determinant of the subordinate bias effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 52A:1999;813-839.
46. Mertus J. Brown lab interactive speech system [Computer software]. 2000;Brown University, Providence, RI.
47. Milberg W., Blumstein S.E., Dworetzky B. Processing of lexical ambiguities in aphasia. Brain and Language. 31:1987;138-150.
48. Paul S.T., Kellas G., Martin M., Clark M.B. Influence of contextual features on the activation of ambiguous word meanings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition. 18:1992;703-717.
49. Prather P.A., Love T., Finkel L., Zurif E. Effects of slowed processing on lexical activation: Automaticity without encapsulation. Brain and Language. 47:1994;326-329.
50. Prather P.A., Zurif E., Love T., Brownell H.H. Speed of lexical activation in nonfluent Broca's aphasia and fluent Wernicke's aphasia. Brain and Language. 59:1997;391-411.
51. Prather P.A., Zurif E., Stern C., Rosen T.J. Slowed lexical access in nonfluent aphasia: A case study. Brain and Language. 43:1992;336-348.
52. Rayner K., Duffy S.A. Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory and Cognition. 14:1986;191-201.
53. Rayner K., Frazier L. Selection mechanisms in reading lexically ambiguous words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition. 15:1989;779-790.
54. Rayner K., Pacht J.M., Duffy S.A. Effects of prior encounter and global discourse bias on the processing of lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye fixations. Journal of Memory and Language. 33:1994;527-544.
55. Rodel M., Cook N.D., Regard M., Landis T. Hemispheric dissociation in judging semantic relations: Complementarity for close and distant associates. Brain and Language. 43:1992;448-459.
56. Sereno S.C. Resolution of lexical ambiguity: Evidence from an eye movement priming paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition. 21:1995;582-595.
57. Simpson G.B. Meaning dominance and semantic context in the processing of lexical ambiguity. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 20:1981;120-136.
58. Simpson G.B. Lexical ambiguity and its role in models of word recognition. Psychological Bulletin. 96:1984;316-340.
59. Simpson G.B. Context and the processing of ambiguous words. Gernsbacher M.A. Handbook of psycholinguistics. 1994;359-374 Academic Press, New York.
60. Simpson G.B., Krueger M.A. Selective access of homograph meanings in sentence context. Journal of Memory and Language. 30:1991;627-643.
61. Stevens J. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. 3rd ed. 1996;Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
62. Swaab T.Y., Brown C.M., Hagoort P. Understanding ambiguous words in sentence contexts: Electrophysiological evidence for delayed contextual selection in Broca's aphasia. Neuropsychologia. 36:1998;737-761.
63. Swinney D.A., Prather P.A., Love T. The time-course of lexical access and the role of context: Converging evidence from normal and aphasic processing. Grodzinsky Y., Shapiro L., Swinney D.A. Language and the brain: Representation and processing. 2000;273-292 Academic Press, San Diego.
64. Swinney D.A., Zurif E., Nicol J.L. The effects of focal brain damage on sentence processing: An examination of the neurological organization of a mental module. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 1:1989;25-37.
65. Tabossi P. Accessing lexical ambiguity in different types of sentential contexts. Journal of Memory and Language. 27:1988;324-340.
66. Tabossi P., Colombo L., Job R. Accessing lexical ambiguity: Effects of context and dominance. Psychological Research. 49:1987;161-167.
67. Titone D.A. Hemispheric differences in context sensitivity during lexical ambiguity resolution. Brain and Language. 65:1998;361-394.
68. Tompkins C.A., Baumgaertner A., Lehman M.T., Fassbinder W. Mechanisms of discourse comprehension impairment after right hemisphere brain damage: Suppression in lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research. 43:2000;62-78.
69. Tompkins C.A., Baumgaertner A., Lehman M.T., Fossett T.R.D. Suppression and discourse comprehension in right brain-damaged adults: A preliminary report. Aphasiology. 11:1997;505-519.
70. Tompkins C.A., Lehman M.T., Baumgaertner A. Suppression and inference revision in right brain-damaged and non-brain-damaged adults. Aphasiology. 13:1999;725-742.
71. Twilley L.C., Dixon P., Taylor D., Clark K. University of Alberta norms of relative meaning frequency for 566 homographs. Memory and Cognition. 22:1994;111-126.
72. Van Lancker D.R., Kempler D. Comprehension of familiar phrases by left- but not by right-hemisphere damaged patients. Brain and Language. 32:1987;265-277.
73. Van Petten C., Kutas M. Ambiguous words in context: An event-related potential analysis of the time course of meaning activation. Journal of Memory and Language. 26:1987;188-208.
74. Vu H., Kellas G., Metcalf K., Herman R. The influence of global discourse on lexical ambiguity resolution. Memory and Cognition. 28:2000;236-252.
75. Vu H., Kellas G., Paul S.T. Sources of sentence constraint on lexical ambiguity resolution. Memory and Cognition. 26:1998;979-1001.
76. Wechsler D.W. Wechsler memory scale-revised. 1987;Harcourt, Brace and Jovanovich, San Antonio.
77. Weylman S., Brownell H.H., Roman M., Gardner H. Appreciation of indirect requests by left- and right-brain-damaged patients: The effects of verbal context and conventionality of wording. Brain and Language. 36:1989;580-591.
78. Wiig E.H., Secord W.A. Test of language competence-expanded edition. 1989;Harcourt, Brace and Jovanovich, San Antonio.
79. Wilson B., Cockburn J., Halligan P. Behavioural inattention test. 1987;Thames Valley Test Company, Titchfield, UK.