Cross-linguistic variation in the neurophysiological response to semantic processing: Evidence from anomalies at the borderline of awareness

Neuropsychologia

Volumn 56, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 147-166

  Tune, Sarah ^a   Schlesewsky, Matthias ^b   Small, Steven L ^c   Sanford, Anthony J ^d   Bohan, Jason ^d   Sassenhagen, Jona ^a   Bornkessel Schlesewsky, Ina ^a  

^a PHILIPPS UNIVERSITY MARBURG   (Germany)

^b JOHANNES GUTENBERG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bidirectional coding account; Borderline anomalies; Bottom up; Cross linguistic differences; Language processing; Late positivity; N400; P600; Shallow processing; Top down

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AWARENESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSS LINGUISTIC VARIATION; DECISION MAKING; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM; EVOKED AUDITORY RESPONSE; FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; KNOWLEDGE; LANGUAGE PROCESSING; LINGUISTICS; MALE; NERVE POTENTIAL; NEUROPHYSIOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SEMANTIC MEMORY;

BIDIRECTIONAL CODING ACCOUNT; BORDERLINE ANOMALIES; BOTTOM-UP; CROSS-LINGUISTIC DIFFERENCES; LANGUAGE PROCESSING; LATE POSITIVITY; N400; P600; SHALLOW PROCESSING; TOP-DOWN;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AWARENESS; BRAIN MAPPING; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LINGUISTICS; MALE; QUESTIONNAIRES; SEMANTICS; TRANSLATING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84893798952     PISSN: 00283932     EISSN: 18733514     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.01.007     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Barton S.B., Sanford A.J. A case-study of anomaly detection: Shallow semantic processing and cohesion establishment. Memory and Cognition 1993, 21:477-487.
2. Bates E., Devescovi A., Wulfeck B. Psycholinguistics: A cross-language perspective. Annual Review of Psychology 2001, 52:369-396.
3. Bohan J., Leuthold H., Hijikata Y., Sanford A.J. The processing of good-fit semantic anomalies: An ERP investigation. Neuropsychologia 2012, 50(14):3174-3184.
4. Bohan J., Sanford A.J. Anomaly detection at the borderline of consciousness: An eyetracking study. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2008, 61:232-239.
5. Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I., Kretzschmar F., Tune S., Wang L., Genç S., Philipp M., et al. Think globally: Cross-linguistic variation in electrophysiological activity during sentence comprehension. Brain and Language 2011, 117:133-152.
6. Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I., Schlesewsky M. An alternative perspective on "semantic P600" effects in language comprehension. Brain Research Reviews 2008, 59:55-73.
7. Brédart S., Modolo K. Moses strikes again: Focalisation effect on a semantic illusion. Acta Psychologica 1988, 67:135-144.
8. Brouwer H., Fitz H., Hoeks J.C.J. Getting real about semantic illusions: Rethinking the functional role of the P600 in language comprehension. Brain Research 2012, 1446:127-143.
9. Bourguignon N., Drury J.E., Valois D., Steinhauer K. Decomposing animacy reversals between agents and experiencers: An ERP study. Brain and Language 2012, 122:179-189.
10. Burkhardt P. Inferential bridging relations reveal distinct neural mechanisms: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Brain and Language 2006, 98:159-168.
11. Büttner A.C. Questions versus statements: Challenging an assumption about semantic illusions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2007, 60(6):779-789.
12. Daneman M., Reingold E.M., Davidson M. Time course of phonological activation during reading: Evidence from eye fixations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 1995, 21:884-898.
13. Erickson T.A., Matteson M.E. From words to meaning: A semantic illusion. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1981, 20:540-552.
14. Faustmann A., Murdoch B.E., Finnigan S.P., Copland D.A. Effects of advancing age on the processing of semantic anomalies in adults: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Experimental Aging Research 2007, 33:439-460.
15. Federmeier K. Thinking ahead: The role and roots of prediction in language comprehension. Psychophysiology 2007, 44:491-505.
16. Ferreira F., Ferraro V., Bailey K.G.D. Good-enough representations in language processing. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2002, 11:11-15.
17. Gunter T.C., Jackson J.L., Mulder G. An electrophysiological study of semantic processes in young and middle-aged academics. Psychophysiology 1992, 29:38-54.
18. Hagoort P. The fractionation of spoken language understanding by measuring electrical and magnetic brain signals. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 2008, 363:1055-1069.
19. Hagoort P., van Berkum J.J.A. Beyond the sentence given. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 2007, 362:801-811.
20. Hannon B., Daneman M. Susceptibility to semantic illusions: An individual-differences perspective. Memory and Cognition 2001, 29:449-461.
21. Hannon B., Daneman M. Shallow semantic processing of text: An individual-differences account. Discourse Processes 2004, 37:187-204.
22. Haupt F.S., Schlesewsky M., Roehm D., Friederici A.D., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I. The status of subject-object reanalyses in the language comprehension architecture. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59:54-96.
23. Hoeks J.C.J., Stowe L.A., Doedens G. Seeing words in context: The interaction of lexical and sentence level information during reading. Cognitive Brain Research 2004, 19:59-73.
24. Howes A., Lewis R.L., Vera A. Rational adaptation under task and processing constraints: Implications for testing theories of cognition and action. Psychological Review 2009, 116:717-751.
25. Huynh H., Feldt L.S. Conditions under which the mean-square ratios in repeated measurement designs have exact F-distributions. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1970, 65:1582-1589.
26. Jung T.P., Makeig S., Humphries C., Lee T.W., McKeown M.J., Iragui V., Sejnowski T.J. Removing electroencephalographic artifacts by blind source separation. Psychophysiology 2000, 37(2):163-178.
27. Keppel G. Design and analysis 1991, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 3rd ed.
28. Kim A., Osterhout L. The independence of combinatory semantic processing: Evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Memory and Language 2005, 52:205-225.
29. Kolk H.H.J., Chwilla D.J., van Herten M., Oor P.J. Structure and limited capacity in verbal working memory: A study with event-related potentials. Brain and Language 2003, 85:1-36.
30. Kuipers J.R., Thierry G. N400 amplitude reduction correlates with an increase in pupil size. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2011, 5:61.
31. Kuperberg G.R., Sitnikova T., Caplan D., Holcomb P. Electrophysiological distinctions in processing conceptual relationships within simple sentences. Cognitive Brain Research 2003, 17:117-129.
32. Kutas M., Federmeier K.D. Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2000, 4:463-469.
33. Kutas M., Hillyard S.A. Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science 1980, 207:203-205.
34. Lakatos P., Karmos G., Mehta A.D., Ulbert I., Schroeder C.E. Entrainment of neuronal oscillations as a mechanism of attentional selection. Science 2008, 320:110-113.
35. Lau E., Phillips C., Poeppel D. A cortical network for semantics: (De)constructing the N400. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience 2008, 9:920-933.
36. Lotze N., Tune S., Schlesewsky M., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I. Meaningful physical changes mediate lexical-semantic integration: Top-down and form-based bottom-up information sources interact in the N400. Neuropsychologia 2011, 49:3573-3582.
37. MacWhinney B., Bates E., Kliegl R. Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1984, 23:127-150.
38. Mathewson K.E., Lleras A., Beck D.M., Fabiani M., Ro T., Gratton G. Pulsed out of awareness: EEG alpha oscillations represent a pulsed-inhibition of ongoing cortical processing. Frontiers in Psychology 2011, 2:99.
39. Oldfield R.C. The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 1971, 9:97-113.
40. Reder L.M., Kusbit G.W. Locus of the Moses Illusion: Imperfect encoding, retrieval or match?. Journal of Memory and Language 1991, 31:385-406.
41. Roehm D., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I., Rösler F., Schlesewsky M. To predict or not to predict: Influences of task and strategy on the processing of semantic relations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2007, 19:1259-1274.
42. Sanford A.J., Garrod S. The role of scenario mapping in text comprehension. Discourse Processes 1998, 26:159-190.
43. Sanford A.J., Graesser A.C. Shallow processing and underspecification. Discourse Processes 2006, 2:99-108.
44. Sanford A.J., Leuthold H., Bohan J., Sanford A.J.S. Anomalies at the borderline of awareness: An ERP study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2011, 93:514-523.
45. Sanford A.J., Sturt P. Depth of processing in language comprehension: Not noticing the evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2002, 6:382-386.
46. Schlesewsky, M., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2009). When semantic P600s turn into N400s: On cross-linguistic differences in online verb-argument linking. In M. Horne, M. Lindgren, M. Roll, K. Alter, & J. v. K. Torkildsen (Eds.), Brain Talk: Discourse with and in the brain. Papers from the first Birgit Rausing Language Program conference in linguistics (pp. 75-97). Lund: Birgit Rausing Language Program.
47. Schumacher P.B. Definteness marking shows late effects during discourse processing: Evidence from ERPs. Anaphora processing and applications 2009, 91-106. Springer, Heidelberg. S.L. Devi, A. Branco, R. Mitkov (Eds.).
48. Schumacher P.B., Baumann S. Pitch accent type affects the N400 during referential processing. Neuroreport 2010, 21:618-622.
49. Shafto M., McKay D.G. The Moses, mega-Moses, and Armstrong illusions: Integrating language comprehension and semantic memory. Psychological Science 2000, 11(5):372-378.
50. Song H., Schwarz N. Fluency and the detection of misleading questions: Low processing fluency attenuates the Moses illusion. Social Cognition 2008, 26:791-799.
51. Steinhauer K., Drury J.E. On the early left-anterior negativity (ELAN) in syntax studies. Brain and Language 2012, 120:135-162.
52. Stroud C., Phillips C. Examining the evidence for an independent semantic analyzer: An ERP study in Spanish. Brain and Language 2012, 120:108-126.
53. van de Meerendonk N., Kolk H.H.J., Chwilla D.J., Vissers C.T.W.M. Monitoring in language perception. Language and Linguistics Compass 2009, 3:1211-1224.
54. van de Meerendonk N., Kolk H.H.J., Vissers C.T.W.M., Chwilla D.J. Monitoring in language perception: Mild and strong conflicts elicit different ERP patterns. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2010, 22:67-82.
55. van Herten M., Chwilla D.J., Kolk H.H.J. When heuristics clash with parsing routines: ERP evidence for conflict monitoring in sentence perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2006, 18:1181-1197.
56. van Herten M., Kolk H.H.J., Chwilla D.J. An ERP study of P600 effects elicited by semantic anomalies. Cognitive Brain Research 2005, 22:241-255.
57. Viola F.C., Thorne J., Edmonds B., Schneider T., Eichele T., Debener S. Semi-automatic identification of independent components representing EEG artifact. Clinical Neurophysiology 2009, 120:868-877.
58. Wang L., Hagoort P., Yang Y. Semantic illusion depends on information structure: ERP evidence. Brain Research 2009, 1282:50-56.
59. Wolff S., Schlesewsky M., Hirotani M., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I. The neural mechanisms of word order processing revisited: Electrophysiological evidence from Japanese. Brain and Language 2008, 107:133-157.