Differential Electrophysiological Signatures of Semantic and Syntactic Scene Processing

Psychological Science

Volumn 24, Issue 9, 2013, Pages 1816-1823

  Võ, Melissa L H ^a   Wolfe, Jeremy M ^a  

^a BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

event related potentials; object recognition; scene grammar; scene perception; semantics; syntax

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN; COMPREHENSION; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS; EVOKED RESPONSE; HUMAN; LINGUISTICS; MALE; METHODOLOGY; OBJECT RECOGNITION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; SCENE GRAMMAR; SCENE PERCEPTION; SEMANTICS; SYNTAX; YOUNG ADULT;

EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS; OBJECT RECOGNITION; SCENE GRAMMAR; SCENE PERCEPTION; SEMANTICS; SYNTAX;

ADULT; BRAIN; COMPREHENSION; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; HUMANS; MALE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; SEMANTICS; VOCABULARY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84883748482     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: 14679280     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0956797613476955     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Barrett S. E.,Rugg M. D.Event-related potentials and the semantic matching of pictures.Brain and Cognition. 1990;14:201-212.
2. Biederman I.,Mezzanotte R. J.,Rabinowitz J. C.Scene perception: Detecting and judging objects undergoing relational violations.Cognitive Psychology. 1982;14:143-177.
3. Brainard D. H.The Psychophysics Toolbox.Spatial Vision. 1997;10:433-436.
4. Chomsky N.Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1965:.
5. Chomsky N.Language and problems of knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1987:.
6. Chomsky N.Philosophy of mind: Classical problems/contemporary issues. Beakley B.Ludlow P., ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2006:751-755.
7. Cohn N.,Paczynski M.,Jackendoff R.,Holcomb P. J.,Kuperberg G. R.(Pea)nuts and bolts of visual narrative: Structure and meaning in sequential image comprehension.Cognitive Psychology. 2012;65:1-38.
8. Demiral Ş. B.,Malcolm G. L.,Henderson J. M.ERP correlates of spatially incongruent object identification during scene viewing: Contextual expectancy versus simultaneous processing.Neuropsychologia. 2012;50:1271-1285.
9. Eddy M.,Schmid A.,Holcomb P. J.Masked repetition priming and event-related brain potentials: A new approach for tracking the time-course of object perception.Psychophysiology. 2006;43:564-568.
10. Friederici A. D.Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing.Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2002;6:78-84.
11. Friederici A. D.,Pfeifer E.,Hahne A.Event-related brain potentials during natural speech processing: Effects of semantic, morphological and syntactic violations.Cognitive Brain Research. 1993;1:183-192.
12. Ganis G.,Kutas M.An electrophysiological study of scene effects on object identification.Cognitive Brain Research. 2003;16:123-144.
13. Henderson J. M.,Ferreira F.The interface of language, vision, and action: Eye movements and the visual world. Henderson J. M.Ferreira F., ed. New York, NY: Psychology Press; 2004:1-58.
14. Holcomb P. J.Semantic priming and stimulus degradation: Implications for the role of the N400 in language processing.Psychophysiology. 1993;30:47-61.
15. Hopf J.-M.,Bader M.,Meng M.,Bayer J.Is human sentence parsing serial or parallel? Evidence from event-related brain potentials.Cognitive Brain Research. 2003;15:165-177.
16. Itti L.,Koch C.A saliency-based search mechanism for overt and covert shifts of visual attention.Vision Research. 2000;40:1489-1506.
17. Kutas M.,Federmeier K. D.Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP).Annual Review of Psychology. 2011;62:621-647.
18. Kutas M.,Hillyard S. A.Event-related brain potentials to semantically inappropriate and surprisingly large words.Biological Psychology. 1980;11:99-116.
19. McPherson W. B.,Holcomb P. J.An electrophysiological investigation of semantic priming with pictures of real objects.Psychophysiology. 1999;36:53-65.
20. Mudrik L.,Lamy D.,Deouell L. Y.ERP evidence for context congruity effects during simultaneous object-scene processing.Neuropsychologia. 2010;48:507-517.
21. Osterhout L.,Holcomb P. J.Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly.Journal of Memory and Language. 1992;31:785-806.
22. Pelli D. G.The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies.Spatial Vision. 1997;10:437-442.
23. Sitnikova T.,Holcomb P. J.,Kiyonaga K. A.,Kuperberg G. R.Two neurocognitive mechanisms of semantic integration during the comprehension of visual real-world events.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2008;20:2037-2057.
24. VõM. L.-H.HendersonJ. M. (2009). Does gravity matter? Effects of semantic and syntactic inconsistencies on the allocation of attention during scene perception. Journal of Vision, 9(3), Article 24. Retrieved from http://www.journalofvision.org/content/9/3/24.full.pdf+html.