Both sides get the point: Hemispheric sensitivities to sentential constraint

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 33, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 871-886

  Federmeier, Kara D ^a   Mai, Heinke ^b   Kutas, Marta ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b OTTO VON GUERICKE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; BRAIN FUNCTION; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEMISPHERE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; MALE; SEMANTICS; VERBAL MEMORY; VISUAL FIELD; ADOLESCENT; BRAIN; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; PHYSIOLOGY; SPEECH;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; BRAIN; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MALE; SPEECH;

EID: 33644873473     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03193082     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. BANICH, M. T. (2002). The divided visual field technique in laterality and interhemispheric integration. In K. Hugdahl (Ed.), Experimental methods in neuropsychology. Boston: Kluwer.
2. BANICH, M. T. (2003). Interaction between the hemispheres and its implications for the processing capacity of the brain. In R. Davidson and K. Hugdahl (Eds.), Brain asymmetry (2nd ed., pp. 261-302). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. BAYNES, K., & ELIASSEN, J. C. (1998). The visual lexicon: Its access and organization in commissurotomy patients. In M. Beeman & C. Chiarello (Eds.), Right hemisphere language comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience (pp. 79-104). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. BEEMAN, M. (1993). Semantic processing in the right hemisphere may contribute to drawing inferences from discourse. Brain & Language, 44, 80-120.
5. BEEMAN, M. (1998). Coarse semantic coding and discourse comprehension. In M. Beeman & C. Chiarello (Eds.), Right hemisphere language comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience (pp. 255-284). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. BEEMAN, M., FRIEDMAN, R. B., GRAFMAN, J., & PEREZ, E. (1994). Summation priming and coarse semantic coding in the right hemisphere. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 6, 26-45.
7. BENTIN, S., MCCARTHY, G., & WOOD, C. C. (1985). Event-related potentials associated with semantic priming. Electroencephalography & Clinical Neurophysiology, 60, 343-355.
8. BERARDI, N., & FIORENTINI, A. (1997). Interhemispheric transfer of spatial and temporal frequency information. In S. Christman (Ed.), Cerebral asymmetries in sensory and perceptual processing (pp. 55-79). New York: Elsevier.
9. BLOOM, P. A., & FISCHLER, I. (1980). Completion norms for 329 sentence contexts. Memory & Cognition, 8, 631-642.
10. BOTTINI, G., CORCORAN, R., STERZI, R., PAULESU, E. S., SCHENONE, P., SCARPA, P., FRACKOWIAK, R. S. J., & FRITH, C. D. (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.
11. BROWNELL, H. H., MICHEL, D., POWELSON, J., & GARDNER, H. (1983). Surprise but not coherence: Sensitivity to verbal humor in right-hemisphere patients. Brain & Language, 18, 20-27.
12. BROWNELL, H. H., POTTER, H. H., BIHRLE, A. M., & GARDNER, H. (1986). Inference deficits in right brain-damaged patients. Brain & Language, 27, 310-321.
13. BUB, D. N., & ARGUIN, M. (1995). Visual word activation in pure alexia. Brain & Language, 49, 77-103.
14. BURGESS, C., & SIMPSON, G. B. (1988). Cerebral hemispheric mechanisms in the retrieval of ambiguous word meanings. Brain & Language, 33, 86-103.
15. CHIARELLO, C. (2003). Parallel systems for processing language: Hemispheric complementarity in the normal brain. In M. T. Banich & M. Mack (Eds.), Mind, brain, and language: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 229-247). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. CHIARELLO, C., BURGESS, C., RICHARDS, L., & POLLOCK, A. (1990). Semantic and associative priming in the cerebral hemispheres: Some words do, some words don't ... sometimes, some places. Brain & Language, 38, 75-104.
17. CHIARELLO, C., LIU, S., & FAUST, M. (2001). Bihemispheric sensitivity to sentence anomaly. Neuropsychologia, 39, 1451-1463.
18. CONEY, J., & MACDONALD, S. (1988). The effect of retention interval upon hemispheric processes in recognition memory. Neuropsychologia, 26, 287-295.
19. DEE, H. L., & FONTENOT, D. J. (1973). Cerebral dominance and lateral differences in perception and memory. Neuropsychologia, 11, 1167-1173.
20. DELIS, D. C., WAPNER, W., GARDNER, H., & MOSES, J. A. (1983). The contribution of the right hemisphere to the organization of paragraphs. Cortex, 19, 43-50.
21. FAUST, M. (1998). Obtaining evidence of language comprehension from sentence priming. In M. Beeman & C. Chiarello (Eds.), Right hemisphere language comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience (pp. 161-185). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
22. FAUST, M., BABKOFF, H., & KRAVETZ, S. (1995). Linguistic processes in the two cerebral hemispheres: Implications for modularity vs. interactionism. Journal of Clinical & Experimental Neuropsychology, 17, 171-192.
23. FAUST, M., BAR-LEV, A., & CHIARELLO, C. (2003). Sentence priming effects in the two cerebral hemispheres: Influences of lexical relatedness, word order, and sentence anomaly. Neuropsychologia, 41, 480-492.
24. FAUST, M., & KRAVETZ, S. (1998). Levels of sentence constraint and lexical decision in the two hemispheres. Brain & Language, 62, 149-162.
25. FAUST, M., KRAVETZ, S., & BABKOFF, H. (1993). Hemisphericity and top-down processing of language. Brain & Language, 44, 1-18.
26. FEDERMEIER, K. D., & KUTAS, M. (1999a). Right words and left words: Electrophysiological evidence for hemispheric differences in meaning processing. Cognitive Brain Research, 8, 373-392.
27. FEDERMEIER, K. D., & KUTAS, M. (1999b). A rose by any other name: Long-term memory structure and sentence processing. Journal of Memory & Language, 41, 469-495.
28. FEDERMEIER, K. D., & KUTAS, M. (2002). Picture the difference: Electrophysiological investigations of picture processing in the cerebral hemispheres. Neuropsychologia, 40, 730-747.
29. FRANCIS, W. N., & KUČERA, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
30. GARDNER, H., BROWNELL, H. H., WAPNER, W., & MICHELOW, D. (1983). Missing the point? The role of the right hemisphere in the processing of complex linguistic materials. In E. Perecman (Ed.), Cognitive processing in the right hemisphere (pp. 169-191). New York: Academic Press.
31. GOUGH, P. B., ALFORD, J. A., JR., & HOLLEY-WILCOX, P. (1981). Words and contexts. In O. J. L. Tzeng & H. Singer (Eds.), Perception of print: Reading research in experimental psychology (pp. 85-102). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. GRIFFIN, Z. M., & BOCK, K. (1998). Constraint, word frequency, and the relationship between lexical processing levels in spoken word production. Journal of Memory & Language, 38, 313-338.
33. HILLYARD, S. A., & MÜNTE, T. F. (1984). Selective attention to color and location: An analysis with event-related brain potentials. Perception & Psychophysics, 36, 185-198.
34. HOPTMAN, M. J., & DAVIDSON, R. J. (1994). How and why do the two cerebral hemispheres interact? Psychological Bulletin, 116, 195-219.
35. JOANETTE, Y., GOULET, P., & HANNEQUIN, D. (1990). Right hemisphere and verbal communication. New York: Springer.
36. KISS, G. R., ARMSTRONG, C., MILROY, R., & PIPER, J. (1973). An associative thesaurus of English and its computer analysis. In A. J. Aitkin, R. W. Bailey, & N. Hamilton-Smith (Eds.), The computer and literary studies (pp. 153-165). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
37. KUTAS, M., & FEDERMEIER, K. D. (2001). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 463-470.
38. KUTAS, M., & HILLYARD, S. A. (1980a). Event-related brain potentials to semantically inappropriate and surprisingly large words. Biological Psychology, 11, 99-116.
39. KUTAS, M., & HILLYARD, S. A. (1980b). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207, 203-205.
40. KUTAS, M., & HILLYARD, S. A. (1983). Event-related brain potentials to grammatical errors and semantic anomalies. Memory & Cognition, 11, 539-550.
41. KUTAS, M., & HILLYARD, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nature, 307, 161-163.
42. KUTAS, M., LINDAMOOD, T. E., & HILLYARD, S. A. (1984). Word expectancy and event-related brain potentials during sentence processing. In S. Kornblum & J. Requin (Eds.), Preparatory states and processes (pp. 217-237). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
43. LUCK, S. J., & HILLYARD, S. A. (1994). Electrophysiological correlates of feature analysis during visual search. Psychophysiology, 31, 291-308.
44. MARTIN, R. C. (2003). Language processing: Functional organization and neuroanatomical basis. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 55-89.
45. NAGY, M. E., & RUOG, M. D. (1989). Modulation of event-related potentials by word repetition: The effects of inter-item lag. Psychophysiology, 26, 431-436.
46. NEVILLE, H. J., KUTAS, M., & SCHMIDT, A. (1982). Event-related potential studies of cerebral specialization during reading: I. Studies of normal adults. Brain & Language, 16, 300-315.
47. NI, W., CONSTABLE, R. T., MENCL, W. E., PUGH, K. R., FULBRIGHT, R. K., SHAYWITZ, S. E., SHAYWITZ, B. A., GORE, J. C., & SHANKWEILER, D. (2000). An event-related neuroimaging study distinguishing form and content in sentence processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 120-133.
48. OLDFIELD, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97-113.
49. RATCLIFF, R., & MCKOON, G. (1988). A retrieval theory of priming in memory. Psychological Review, 95, 385-408.
50. RAYNER, K., & WELL, A. D. (1996). Effects of contextual constraint on eye movements in reading: A further examination. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 504-509.
51. ROBERTSON, D. A., GERNSBACHER, M. A., GUIDOTTI, S. J., ROBERTSON, R. R. W., IRWIN, W., MOCK, B. J., & CAMPANA, M. E. (2000). Functional neuroanatomy of the cognitive process of mapping during discourse comprehension. Psychological Science, 11, 255-260.
52. RUGG, M. D., MILNER, A. D., & LINES, C. R. (1985). Visual evoked potentials to lateralised stimuli in two cases of callosal agenesis. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, & Psychiatry, 48, 367-373.
53. SANOCKI, T., & ODEN, G. C. (1984). Contextual validity and the effects of low-constraint sentence contexts on lexical decisions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36A, 145-156.
54. SCHWANENFLUGEL, P. J., & SHOBEN, E. J. (1985). The influence of sentence constraint on the scope of facilitation for upcoming words. Journal of Memory & Language, 24, 232-252.
55. ST. GEORGE, M., KUTAS, M., MARTINEZ, A., & SERENO, M. I. (1999). Semantic integration in reading: Engagement of the right hemisphere during discourse processing. Brain, 122, 1317-1325.
56. TAYLOR, W. L. (1953). "Cloze procedure": A new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Quarterly, 30, 415-433.
57. TITONE, D. (1998). Hemispheric differences in context sensitivity during lexical ambiguity resolution. Brain & Language, 65, 361-394.
58. VAN PETTEN, C. (1993). A comparison of lexical and sentence-level context effects in event-related potentials. Language & Cognitive Processes, 8, 485-531.
59. VAN PETTEN, C., & KUTAS, M. (1990). Interactions between sentence context and word frequency in event-related brain potentials. Memory & Cognition, 18, 380-393.
60. WAPNER, W., HAMBY, S., & GARDNER, H. (1981). The role of the right hemisphere in the apprehension of complex linguistic materials Brain & Language, 14, 15-33.
61. WEYLMAN, S. T., BROWNELL, H. H., ROMAN, M., & GARDNER, H. (1989). Appreciation of indirect requests by left- and right-brain-damaged patients: The effects of verbal context and conventionality of wording. Brain & Language, 36, 580-591.
62. ZAIDEL, E. (1990). Language functions in the two hemispheres following complete cerebral commissurotomy and hemispherectomy. In F. Boiler & J. Grafman (Series Eds.) & R. D. Nebes & S. Corkin (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of neuropsychology (Vol. 4, pp. 115-150). Amsterdam: Elsevier.