Preattentive phonotactic processing as indexed by the mismatch negativity

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Volumn 22, Issue 10, 2010, Pages 2174-2185

  Steinberg, Johanna ^a   Truckenbrodt, Hubert ^b   Jacobsen, Thomas ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG   (Germany)

^b Centre for General Linguistics ZAS   (Germany)

^c HELMUT SCHMIDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; BRAIN FUNCTION; COGNITION; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LANGUAGE; MALE; MISMATCH NEGATIVITY; NEUROPHYSIOLOGY; NORMAL HUMAN; PHONETICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH; VOWEL; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BRAIN MAPPING; CONTINGENT NEGATIVE VARIATION; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED AUDITORY RESPONSE; METHODOLOGY; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTENTION; BRAIN MAPPING; CONTINGENT NEGATIVE VARIATION; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; PHONETICS; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; REACTION TIME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77956915574     PISSN: 0898929X     EISSN: 15308898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/jocn.2009.21408     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Bishop, D. V. M., O'Reilly, J., & McArthur, G. (2005). Electrophysiological evidence implicates automatic low-level feature detectors in perceptual asymmetry. Cognitive Brain Research, 24, 177-179.
2. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2008). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.0.35) [Computer program]. Retrieved September 23, 2008, from http://www.praat.org/.
3. Bonte, M. L., Mitterer, H., Zellagui, N., Poelmans, H., & Blomert, L. (2005). Auditory cortical tuning to statistical regularities in phonology. Clinical Neurophysiology, 116, 2765-2774. (Pubitemid 41714026)
4. De Lacy, P. (2007). The Cambridge handbook of phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Dehaene-Lambertz, G. (1997). Electrophysiological correlates of categorical phoneme perception in adults. NeuroReport, 8, 919-924.
6. Dehaene-Lambertz, G., Dupoux, E., & Gout, A. (2000). Electrophysiological correlates of phonological processing: A cross-linguistic study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 635-647. (Pubitemid 30609389)
7. Eulitz, C., & Lahiri, A. (2004). Neurobiological evidence for abstract phonological representations in the mental lexicon during speech recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 577-583. (Pubitemid 38639605)
8. Féry, C. (2001). Phonologie des Deutschen: Eine optimalitätstheoretische Einführung. Teil 2 (Linguistics in Potsdam 11). Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.
9. Flagg, E. J., Cardy, J. E. O., & Roberts, T. P. L. (2006). MEG detects neural consequences of anomalous nasalization in vowel-consonant pairs. Neuroscience Letters, 397, 263-268.
10. Gordon, M., Barthmaier, P., & Sands, K. (2002). A cross-linguistic acoustic study of voiceless fricatives. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 32, 141-174.
11. Hall, T. A. (1989). Lexical phonology and the distribution of German [ç] and [x]. Phonology, 6, 1-17.
12. Hall, T. A. (1992). Syllable structure and syllable-related processes in German. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
13. Hallé, P. A., Segui, J., Frauenfelder, U., & Meunier, C. (1998). Processing of illegal consonant clusters: A case of perceptual assimilation? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 592-608.
14. Ikeda, K., Hayashi, A., Hashimoto, S., Otomo, K., & Kanno, A. (2002). Asymmetrical mismatch negativity in humans as determined by phonetic but not physical difference. Neuroscience Letters, 321, 133-136. (Pubitemid 34203817)
15. Jacobsen, T., Schröger, E., & Alter, K. (2004). Pre-attentive perception of vowel phonemes from variable speech stimuli. Psychophysiology, 41, 654-659. (Pubitemid 38879780)
16. Jacobsen, T., Schröger, E., Winkler, I., & Horváth, J. (2005). Familiarity affects the processing of task-irrelevant auditory deviance. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 1704-1713.
17. Jaramillo, M., Ilvonen, T., Kujala, T., Alku, P., Tervaniemi, M., & Alho, K. (2001). Are different kinds of acoustic features processed differently for speech and nonspeech sounds? Cognitive Brain Research, 12, 459-466.
18. Johnson, K. (2002). Acoustic and auditory phonetics (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
19. Jongman, A., Wayland, R., & Wong, S. (2000). Acoustic characteristics of English fricatives. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 108, 1252-1263.
20. Kenstowicz, M. (1994). Phonology in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
21. MacFarland, T., & Pierrehumbert, J. (1991). On ich-Laut, ach-Laut and structure preservation. Phonology, 8, 171-180.
22. Merchant, J. (1996). Alignment and fricative assimilation in German. Linguistic Inquiry, 27, 709-719.
23. Mitterer, H., & Blomert, L. (2003). Coping with phonological assimilation in speech perception: Evidence for early compensation. Perception and Psychophysics, 65, 956-969. (Pubitemid 37537730)
24. Näätänen, R. (2001). The perception of speech sounds by the human brain as reflected by the mismatch negativity (MMN) and its magnetic equivalent (MMNm). Psychophysiology, 38, 1-21.
25. Näätänen, R., Lehtokoski, A., Lennes, M., Cheour-Luhtanen, M., Huotilainen, M., Iivonen, A., et al. (1997). Language-specific phoneme representations revealed by electric and magnetic brain responses. Nature, 385, 432-434.
26. Näätänen, R., Paavilainen, P., Rinne, T., & Alho, K. (2007). The mismatch negativity (MMN) in basic research of central auditory processing: A review. Clinical Neurophysiology, 118, 2544-2590. (Pubitemid 350182437)
27. Noske, M. (1997). Feature spreading as dealignment: The distribution of [ç] and [x] in German. Phonology, 14, 221-234.
28. Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97-113.
29. Pettigrew, C. M., Murdoch, B. M., Kei, J., Chenery, H. J., Sockalingam, R., Ponton, C. W., et al. (2004). Processing of English words with fine acoustic contrasts and simple tones: A mismatch negativity study. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 15, 47-66.
30. Phillips, C., Pellathy, T., Marantz, A., Yellin, E., Wexler, K., Poeppel, D., et al. (2000). Auditory cortex accesses phonological categories: An MEG mismatch study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 1038-1055. (Pubitemid 32014498)
31. Pulvermüller, F., Kujala, T., Shtyrov, Y., Simola, J., Tiitinen, H., Alku, P., et al. (2001). Memory traces for words as revealed by the mismatch negativity. Neuroimage, 14, 607-616.
32. Schröger, E. (1998). Measurement and interpretation of the mismatch negativity. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 30, 131-145.
33. Schröger, E., Tervaniemi, M., & Huotilainen, M. (2004). Bottom-up and top-down flow of information within auditory memory: Electrophysiological evidence. In C. Kaernbach, E. Schröger, & H. Müller (Eds.), Psychophysics beyond sensation: Laws and invariants of human cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Sharma, A., & Dorman, M. F. (2000). Neurophysiologic correlates of cross-language phonetic perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 107, 2697-2703. (Pubitemid 30304915)
35. Weber, A. (2001). Help or hindrance: How violation of different assimilation rules affects spoken-language processing. Language and Speech, 44, 95-118.
36. Winkler, I., Lehtokoski, A., Alku, P., Vainio, M., Czigler, I., Csepe, V., et al. (1999). Pre-attentive detection of vowel contrasts utilizes both phonetic and auditory memory representations. Cognitive Brain Research, 7, 357-369.