Early effects of neighborhood density and phonotactic probability of spoken words on event-related potentials

Brain and Language

Volumn 127, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 463-474

  Hunter, Cynthia R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

Author keywords

ERP; Lexical activation; Lexical decision; Neighborhood density; P200; Phonotactic probability; Spoken word recognition

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; EXPERIMENTAL TEST; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MALE; NEIGHBORHOOD DENSITY; NORMAL HUMAN; PHONETICS; PHONOTACTIC PROBABILITY; RESPONSE TIME; SPEECH; TASK PERFORMANCE; WORD RECOGNITION;

ERP; LEXICAL ACTIVATION; LEXICAL DECISION; NEIGHBORHOOD DENSITY; P200; PHONOTACTIC PROBABILITY; SPOKEN WORD RECOGNITION;

BRAIN; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PHONETICS; REACTION TIME; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 84888021793     PISSN: 0093934X     EISSN: 10902155     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2013.09.006     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Allopenna P.D., Magnuson J.S., Tanenhaus M.K. Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: Evidence for continuous mapping models. Journal of Memory and Language 1998, 38:419-439.
2. Barber H., Vergara M., Carreiras M. Syllable-frequency effects in visual word recognition: Evidence from ERPs. Neuroreport 2004, 15(3):545-548.
3. Boersma P. Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International 2002, 5(9/10):341-345.
4. Bonte M.L., Mitterer H., Zellagui N., Poelmans H., Blomert L. Auditory cortical tuning to statistical regularities in phonology. Clinical Neurophysiology 2005, 116:2765-2774.
5. Braun M., Hutzler F., Ziegler J.C., Dambacher M., Jacobs A.M. Pseudohomophone effects provide evidence of early lexico-phonological processing in visual word recognition. Human Brain Mapping 2009, 30(7):1977-1989.
6. Breznitz Z., Berman L. The underlying factors of word reading rate. Educational Psychology Review 2003, 15(3):247-265.
7. Breznitz Z., Misra M. Speed of processing of the visual-orthographic and auditory-phonological systems in adult dyslexics: The contribution of "asynchrony" to word recognition deficits. Brain and Language 2003, 85(3):486-502.
8. Brysbaert M., New B. Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods 2009, 41(4):977-990.
9. Cortese M.J., Fugett A. Imageability ratings for 3000 monosyllabic words. Behavior Research Methods 2004, 36(3):384-387.
10. Crowley K.E., Colrain I.M. A review of the evidence for P2 being an independent component process: age, sleep and modality. Clinical Neurophysiology 2004, 115(4):732-744.
11. Davis M.H., Marslen-Wilson W.D., Gaskell M.G. Leading up the lexical garden path: Segmentation and ambiguity in spoken word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2002, 28(1):218.
12. Dehaene-Lambertz G., Dupoux E., Gout A. Electrophysiological correlates of phonological processing: a cross-linguistic study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2000, 12(4):635-647.
13. Delorme A., Makeig S. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of neuroscience methods 2004, 134(1):9-21.
14. Digeser F.M., Wohlberedt T., Hoppe U. Contribution of spectrotemporal features on auditory event-related potentials elicited by consonant-vowel syllables. Ear and Hearing 2009, 30(6):704.
15. Dimitrijevic A., Michalewski H.J., Zeng F., Pratt H., Starr A. Frequency changes in a continuous tone: Auditory cortical potentials. Clinical Neurophysiology 2008, 119(9):2111-2124.
16. Doellinger M., Burger M., Hoppe U., Eysholdt U. Effects of consonant-vowel transition in speech stimuli on cortical auditory evoked potentials in adults. The Open Neurology Journal 2011, 5:37-45.
17. Dufour S., Brunelliere A., Frauenfelder U.H. Tracking the time course of word-frequency effects in spoken word recognition with event-related potentials. Cognitive Science 2012, 10.1111/cogs.12015.
18. Dufour S., Frauenfelder U.H. Phonological neighbourhood effects in French spoken-word recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2010, 63(2):226-238.
19. Dunn B.R., Dunn D.A., Languis M., Andrews D. The relation of ERP components to complex memory processing. Brain and Cognition 1998, 36:355-376.
20. Garcia-Larrea L., Lukaszewicz A.C., Mauguiere F. Revisiting the oddball paradigm. Non-target vs. neutral stimuli and the evaluation of ERP attentional effects. Neuropsychologia 1992, 30(8):723-741.
21. Gaskell M.G., Marslen-Wilson W.D. Integrating form and meaning: A distributed model of speech perception. Language and Cognitive Processes 1997, 12(5-6):613-656.
22. Goldinger S.D., Luce P.A., Pisoni D.B. Priming lexical neighbors of spoken words: Effects of competition and inhibition. Journal of Memory and Language 1989, 28:501-518.
23. Gómez-Herrero, G. (2007). Automatic Artifact Removal (AAR) toolbox v1. 3 (Release 09.12.07) for MATLAB.
24. Grainger J., Jacobs A.M. Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review 1996, 103(3):518.
25. Grosjean F. The recognition of words after their acoustic offset: Evidence and implications. Perception & Psychophysics 1985, 38(4):299-310.
26. Guthrie D., Buchwald J.S. Significance testing of difference potentials. Psychophysiology 1991, 28(2):240.
27. Hauk O., Davis M.H., Ford M., Pulvermüller F., Marslen-Wilson W.D. The time course of visual word recognition as revealed by linear regression analysis of ERP data. Neuroimage 2006, 30(4):1383-1400.
28. Hauk O., Pulvermuller F., Ford M., Marslen-Wilson W.D., Davis M.H. Can I have a quick word? Early electrophysiological manifestations of psycholinguistic processes revealed by event-related regression analysis of the EEG. Biological Psychology 2008, 80(1):64-74.
29. Holcomb P.J., Grainger J., O'Rourke T. An Electrophysiological study of the effects of orthographic neighborhood size on printed word perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2002, 14(6):938-950.
30. Hsu C.H., Tsai J.L., Lee C.Y., Tzeng O.J.L. Orthographic combinability and phonological consistency effects in reading Chinese phonograms: An event-related potential study. Brain and Language 2009, 108(1):56-66.
31. Kucera H., Francis W.N. Computational analysis of present-day American English 1967, Brown University Press, Providence, RI.
32. Laszlo S., Federmeier K.D. The N400 as a snapshot of interactive processing: Evidence from regression analyses of orthographic neighbor and lexical associate effects. Psychophysiology 2010, 48(2):176-186.
33. Lee C.Y., Tsai J.L., Chan W.H., Hsu C.H., Hung D.L., Tzeng O.J. Temporal dynamics of the consistency effect in reading Chinese: An event-related potentials study. Neuroreport 2007, 18(2):147-151.
34. Luce P.A., Goldinger S.D., Auer E.T., Vitevitch M.S. Phonetic priming, neighborhood activation, and PARSYN. Perception and Psychophysics 2000, 62(3):615-625.
35. Luce P.A., Large N.R. Phonotactics, density, and entropy in spoken word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes 2001, 16:565-581.
36. Luce P.A., Pisoni D.B. Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing 1998, 19:1-36.
37. Luck S.J., Hillyard S.A. Electrophysiological correlates of feature analysis during visual search. Psychophysiology 1994, 31:291-308.
38. MacGregor L.J., Pulvermuller F., van Casteren M., Shtyrov Y. Ultra-rapid access to words in the brain. Nature Communications 2012, 3. Article no. 711.
39. Magnuson J.S., Dixon J.A., Tanenhaus M.K., Aslin R.N. The dynamics of lexical competition during spoken word recognition. Cognitive Science 2007, 31(1):133-156.
40. Marinkovic K., Dhond R.P., Dale A.M., Glessner M., Carr V., Halgren E. Spatiotemporal dynamics of modality-specific and supramodal word processing. Neuron 2003, 38(3):487-497.
41. Marslen-Wilson W. Access and integration: Projecting sound onto meaning. Lexical representation and process 1989, 3-24. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. W. Marslen-Wilson (Ed.).
42. Marslen-Wilson W.D., Tyler L.K. The temporal structure of spoken language understanding. Cognition 1980, 8:1-71.
43. McClelland J.L., Elman J.L. The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology 1986, 18:1-86.
44. Muller O., Dunabeitia J.A., Carreiras M. Orthographic and associative neighborhood density: What is shared, what is different?. Psychophysiology 2010, 47:455-466.
45. Nelson D.L., McEvoy C.L., Schreiber T.A. The University of South Florida free association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. Behavior Research Methods 2004, 36(3):402-407.
46. Norris D., McQueen J.M. Shortlist B: A Bayesian model of continuous speech recognition. Psychological Review 2008, 115(2):357.
47. Pattamadilok C., Perre L., Dufau S., Ziegler J.C. On-line orthographic influences on spoken language in a semantic task. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2009, 21(1):169-179.
48. Pulvermuller F., Shtyrov Y., Ilmoniemi R.J., Marslen-Wilson W.D. Tracking speech comprehension in space and time. NeuroImage 2006, 31(3):1297-1305.
49. Pylkkänen L., Marantz A. Tracking the time course of word recognition with MEG. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2003, 7(5):187-189.
50. Pylkkänen L., Stringfellow A., Marantz A. Neuromagnetic evidence for the timing of lexical activation: An MEG component sensitive to phonotactic probability but not to neighborhood density. Brain and Language 2002, 81(1):666-678.
51. Roberts T.P.L., Ferrari P., Stufflebeam S.M., Poeppel D. Latency of auditory evoked neuromagnetic field components: Stimulus dependence and insights toward perception. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology 2000, 17(2):114-129.
52. Rugg M.D., Nieto-Vegas M. Modality-specific effects of immediate word repetition: Electrophysiological evidence. NeuroReport 1999, 10(12):2661-2664.
53. Steinberg J., Truckenbrodt H., Jacobsen T. Phonotactic constraint violations in German grammar are detected automatically in auditory speech processing: A human event-related potentials study. Psychophysiology 2011, 48(9):1208-1216.
54. Stockall L., Stringfellow A., Marantz A. The precise time course of lexical activation: MEG measurements of the effects of frequency, probability, and density in lexical decision. Brain and Language 2004, 90(1):88-94.
55. Storkel H.L., Armbruster J., Hogan T.P. Differentiating phonotactic probability and neighborhood density in adult word learning. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 2006, 49(6):1175.
56. Strijkers K., Holcomb P.J., Costa A. Conscious intention to speak proactively facilitates lexical access during overt object naming. Journal of Memory and Language 2011, 65(4):345-362.
57. Taler V., Phillips N.A. Event-related potential evidence for early effects of neighborhood density in word recognition. NeuroReport 2007, 18(18):1957-1961.
58. Tremblay K.L., Friesen L., Martin B.A., Wright R. Test-retest reliability of cortical evoked potentials using naturally produced speech sounds. Ear and Hearing 2003, 24:225-232.
59. Vergara-Martinez M., Swaab T.Y. Orthographic neighborhood effects as a function of word frequency: An event-related potential study. Psychophysiology 2012, 49(9):1277-1289.
60. Vitevitch M.S. Influence of onset density on spoken-word recognition. Journal of experimental psychology: Human perception and performance 2002, 28(2):270.
61. Vitevitch M.S. The influence of sublexical and lexical representations on the processing of spoken words in English. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics 2003, 17:487-499.
62. Vitevitch M.S., Luce P.A. When words compete: Levels of processing in spoken word perception. Psychological Science 1998, 9:325-329.
63. Vitevitch M.S., Luce P.A. Probabilistic phonotactics and spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language 1999, 40:374-408.
64. Vitevitch M.S., Luce P.A. A web-based interface to calculated phonotactic probability for words and nonwords in English. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 2004, 36(3):481-487.
65. Vitevitch M.S., Luce P.A. Increases in phonotactic probability facilitate spoken nonword repetition. Journal of Memory & Language 2005, 52:193-204.
66. Woodman G.F. A brief introduction to the use of event-related potentials in studies of perception and attention. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics 2010, 72(8):2031-2046.
67. Woods, D. L. (1990). The physiological basis of selective attention: Implications of event-related potential studies. Event-related brain potentials: Basic issues and applications (pp. 178-209).
68. Zwisterlood P. The locus of the effects of sentential-semantic context in spoken-word processing. Cognition 1989, 32:25-64.