Narrowed expectancies under degraded speech: Revisiting the N400

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Volumn 25, Issue 8, 2013, Pages 1383-1395

  Strauß, Antje ^a   Kotz, Sonja A ^a   Obleser, Jonas ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN COGNITIVE AND BRAIN SCIENCES   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTICS; ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM; EVOKED SOMATOSENSORY RESPONSE; FEMALE; HEARING; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH; TEMPORAL CORTEX; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED RESPONSE; LINGUISTICS; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; COMPREHENSION; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS; SPEECH; SPEECH PERCEPTION; VOCABULARY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84879932801     PISSN: 0898929X     EISSN: 15308898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_00389     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Aydelott, J., Baer-Henney, D., Trzaskowski, M., Leech, R., & Dick, F. (2012). Sentence comprehension in competing speech: Dichotic sentence-word priming reveals hemispheric differences in auditory semantic processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 1108-1144.
2. Aydelott, J., Dick, F., & Mills, D. L. (2006). Effects of acoustic distortion and semantic context on event-related potentials to spoken words. Psychophysiology, 43, 454-464.
3. Benki, J. R. (2003). Quantitative evaluation of lexical status, word frequency, and neighborhood density as context effects in spoken word recognition. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113, 1689-1705.
4. Bilger, R. C., Nuetzel, J. M., Rabinowitz, W. M., & Rzeczkowski, C. (1984). Standardization of a test of speech perception in noise. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 27, 32-48.
5. Boulenger, V., Hoen, M., Jacquier, C., & Meunier, F. (2011). Interplay between acoustic/phonetic and semantic processes during spoken sentence comprehension: An ERP study. Brain and Language, 116, 51-63.
6. Brysbaert, M., Buchmeier, M., Conrad, M., Jacobs, A. M., Bölte, J., & Böhl, A. (2011). The word frequency effect: A review of recent developments and implications for the choice of frequency estimates in German. Experimental Psychology, 58, 412-424.
7. Cleland, A. A., Gaskell, M. G., Quinlan, P. T., & Tamminen, J. (2006). Frequency effects in spoken and visual word recognition: Evidence from dual-task methodologies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 104-119.
8. Connolly, J. F., & Phillips, N. A. (1994). Event-related potential components reflect phonological and semantic processing of the terminal word of spoken sentences. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 6, 256-266.
9. Connolly, J. F., Phillips, N. A., Stewart, S. H., & Brake, W. G. (1992). Event-related potential sensitivity to acoustic and semantic properties of terminal words in sentences. Brain and Language, 43, 1-18.
10. Connolly, J. F., Stewart, S. H., & Phillips, N. A. (1990). The effects of processing requirements on neurophysiological responses to spoken sentences. Brain and Language, 39, 302-318.
11. D'Arcy, R. C. N., Connolly, J. F., Service, E., Hawco, C. S., & Houlihan, M. E. (2004). Separating phonological and semantic processing in auditory sentence processing: A high-resolution event-related brain potential study. Human Brain Mapping, 22, 40-51.
12. D'Arcy, R. C. N., Service, E., Connolly, J. F., & Hawco, C. S. (2005). The influence of increased working memory load on semantic neural systems: A high-resolution event-related brain potential study. Cognitive Brain Research, 22, 177-191.
13. Davis, M. H., Ford, M. A., Kherif, F., & Johnsrude, I. S. (2011). Does semantic context benefit speech understanding through "top-down" processes? Evidence from time-resolved Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience sparse fMRI. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 3914-3932.
14. Davis, M. H., & Johnsrude, I. S. (2003). Hierarchical processing in spoken language comprehension. The Journal of Neuroscience, 23, 3423-3431.
15. Desroches, A. S., Newman, R. L., & Joanisse, M. F. (2009). Investigating the time course of spoken word recognition: Electrophysiological evidence for the influences of phonological similarity. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21, 1893-1906.
16. Eisner, F., McGettigan, C., Faulkner, A., Rosen, S., & Scott, S. K. (2010). Inferior frontal gyrus activation predicts individual differences in perceptual learning of cochlear-implant simulations. The Journal of Neuroscience, 30, 7179-7186.
17. Federmeier, K. D., & Kutas, M. (1999). Right words and left words: Electrophysiological evidence for hemispheric differences in meaning processing. Cognitive Brain Research, 8, 373-392.
18. Ferrand, L., Brysbaert, M., Keuleers, E., New, B., Bonin, P., Méot, A., et al. (2011). Comparing word processing times in naming, lexical decision, and progressive demasking: Evidence from chronolex. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 306. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00306.
19. Friedrich, C. K., & Kotz, S. A. (2007). Event-related potential evidence of form and meaning coding during online speech recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 594-604.
20. Gagnepain, P., Henson, R. N., & Davis, M. H. (2012). Temporal predictive codes for spoken words in auditory cortex. Current Biology, 22, 615-621.
21. Geyken, A. (2011). Statistische Wortprofile zur schnellen Analyse der Syntagmatik in Textkorpora. In A. Abel & R. Zanin (Eds.), Korpora in Lehre und Forschung (pp. 129-154), Bozen-Bolzano University Press.
22. Gunter, T. C., Friederici, A. D., & Schriefers, H. (2000). Syntactic gender and semantic expectancy: ERPs reveal early autonomy and late interaction. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 556-568.
23. Halgren, E., Dhond, R. P., Christensen, N., Van Petten, C., Marinkovic, K., Lewine, J. D., et al. (2002). N400-like magnetoencephalography responses modulated by semantic context, word frequency, and lexical class in sentences. Neuroimage, 17, 1101-1116.
24. Holcomb, P. J. (1993). Semantic priming and stimulus degradation: Implications for the role of the N400 in language processing. Psychophysiology, 30, 47-61.
25. Howes, D. (1957). On the relation between the probability of a word as an association and in general linguistic usage. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 54, 75-85.
26. Joordens, S., & Besner, D. (1992). Priming effects that span an intervening unrelated word: Implications for models of memory representation and retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 483-491.
27. Jurafsky, D. (2003). Probabilistic modeling in psycholinguistics: Linguistic comprehension and production. In R. Bod, J. Hay, & S. Jannedy (Eds.), Probabilistic linguistics (pp. 39-95). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. Kalikow, D. N., Stevens, K. N., & Elliott, L. L. (1977). Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 61, 1337-1351.
29. Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2000). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 463-470.
30. Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207, 203-205.
31. Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nature, 307, 161-163.
32. Lau, E. F., Phillips, C., & Poeppel, D. (2008). A cortical network for semantics: (De)constructing the N400. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9, 920-933.
33. Lin, D. (1998). Automatic retrieval and clustering of similar words. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics-Volume 2 (pp. 768-774). Stroudsburg, PA, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics. doi:10.3115/980432.980696.
34. Luce, P. A., & Pisoni, D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing, 19, 1-36.
35. Mattys, S. L., Brooks, J., & Cooke, M. (2009). Recognizing speech under a processing load: Dissociating energetic from informational factors. Cognitive Psychology, 59, 203-243.
36. McGettigan, C., Faulkner, A., Altarelli, I., Obleser, J., Baverstock, H., & Scott, S. K. (2012). Speech comprehension aided by multiple modalities: Behavioural and neural interactions. Neuropsychologia, 50, 762-776.
37. Miller, G. A., Heise, G. A., & Lichten, W. (1951). The intelligibility of speech as a function of the context of the test materials. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41, 329-335.
38. Miller, G. A., & Isard, S. (1963). Some perceptual consequences of linguistic rules. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2, 217-228.
39. Newman, R. L., & Connolly, J. F. (2009). Electrophysiological markers of pre-lexical speech processing: Evidence for bottom-up and top-down effects on spoken word processing. Biological Psychology, 80, 114-121.
40. Norris, D., & McQueen, J. M. (2008). Shortlist B: A Bayesian model of continuous speech recognition. Psychological Review, 115, 357-395.
41. Obleser, J., Eisner, F., & Kotz, S. A. (2008). Bilateral speech comprehension reflects differential sensitivity to spectral and temporal features. The Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 8116-8123.
42. Obleser, J., & Kotz, S. A. (2010). Expectancy constraints in degraded speech modulate the language comprehension network. Cerebral Cortex, 20, 633-640.
43. Obleser, J., & Kotz, S. A. (2011). Multiple brain signatures of integration in the comprehension of degraded speech. Neuroimage, 55, 713-723.
44. Obleser, J., & Weisz, N. (2012). Suppressed alpha oscillations predict intelligibility of speech and its acoustic details. Cerebral Cortex, 22, 2466-2477.
45. Obleser, J., Wise, R. J. S., Alex Dresner, M., & Scott, S. K. (2007). Functional integration across brain regions improves speech perception under adverse listening conditions. The Journal of Neuroscience, 27, 2283-2289.
46. Obleser, J., Wöstmann, M., Hellbernd, N., Wilsch, A., & Maess, B. (2012). Adverse listening conditions and memory load drive a common alpha oscillatory network. The Journal of Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 32, 12376-12383.
47. Paulmann, S., Ott, D. V. M., & Kotz, S. A. (2011). Emotional speech perception unfolding in time: The role of the basal ganglia. PloS One, 6, e17694. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0017694
48. Pichora-Fuller, M. K. (2003). Cognitive aging and auditory information processing. International Journal of Audiology, 42(Suppl. 2), 2S26-2S32.
49. Piquado, T., Cousins, K. A. Q., Wingfield, A., & Miller, P. (2010). Effects of degraded sensory input on memory for speech: Behavioral data and a test of biologically constrained computational models. Brain Research, 1365, 48-65.
50. Rabbitt, P. M. (1968). Channel-capacity, intelligibility and immediate memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 241-248.
51. Riecke, L., Esposito, F., Bonte, M., & Formisano, E. (2009). Hearing illusory sounds in noise: The timing of sensory-perceptual transformations in auditory cortex. Neuron, 64, 550-561.
52. Romei, L., Wambacq, I. J. A., Besing, J., Koehnke, J., & Jerger, J. (2011). Neural indices of spoken word processing in background multi-talker babble. International Journal of Audiology, 50, 321-333.
53. Schroeger, E., Trevaniemi, M., & Huotilainen, M. (2003). Bottom-up and top-down flows of information within auditory memory: Electrophysiological evidence. In C. Kaernbach, H. Mueller, & E. Schroeger (Eds.), Psychophysics beyond sensation: Laws and invariants of human cognition (pp. 389-410). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
54. Sivonen, P., Maess, B., & Friederici, A. D. (2006). Semantic retrieval of spoken words with an obliterated initial phoneme in a sentence context. Neuroscience Letters, 408, 220-225.
55. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1983). On priming by a sentence context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112, 1-36.
56. Stickney, G. S., & Assmann, P. F. (2001). Acoustic and linguistic factors in the perception of bandpass-filtered speech. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 109, 1157-1165.
57. Tallon-Baudry, C., & Bertrand, O. (1999). Oscillatory gamma activity in humans and its role in object representation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 151-162.
58. Taylor, W. L. (1953). "Cloze procedure": A new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Quarterly, 30, 415-433.
59. van den Brink, D., Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (2006).
60. The cascaded nature of lexical selection and integration in auditory sentence processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 364-372.
61. Van Petten, C., & Kutas, M. (1990). Interactions between sentence context and word frequency in event-related brain potentials. Memory & Cognition, 18, 380-393.
62. Van Petten, C., & Luka, B. J. (2006). Neural localization of semantic context effects in electromagnetic and hemodynamic studies. Brain and Language, 97, 279-293.
63. Van Petten, C., & Luka, B. J. (2012). Prediction during language comprehension: Benefits, costs, and ERP components. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 83, 176-190.
64. Wingfield, A., Tun, P. A., Koh, C. K., & Rosen, M. J. (1999). Regaining lost time: Adult aging and the effect of time restoration on recall of time-compressed speech. Psychology and Aging, 14, 380-389.