The role of morphology in phoneme prediction: Evidence from MEG

Brain and Language

Volumn 129, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 14-23

  Ettinger, Allyson ^a,c   Linzen, Tal ^a   Marantz, Alec ^a,b  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NEW YORK UNIVERSITY ABU DHABI   (United Arab Emirates)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Entropy; MEG; Morphology; Prediction; Spoken word recognition; Surprisal

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDITORY CORTEX; ENTROPY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; MALE; MORPHOLOGY; NERVOUS SYSTEM PARAMETERS; NEURAL ACTIVITY; PHONEME; PREDICTION; REGION OF INTEREST; RIGHT HANDEDNESS; SPOKEN WORD RECOGNITION; SUPERIOR TEMPORAL GYRUS; TEMPORAL GYRUS; TRANSVERSE TEMPORAL GYRUS; WORD RECOGNITION; ADULT; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; LINGUISTICS; PHONETICS; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ADULT; AUDITORY CORTEX; FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; LINGUISTICS; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; MALE; PHONETICS; REACTION TIME; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 84896832210     PISSN: 0093934X     EISSN: 10902155     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2013.11.004     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Adachi Y., Shimogawara M., Higuchi M., Haruta Y., Ochiai M. Reduction of non-periodic environmental magnetic noise in MEG measurement by continuously adjusted least squares method. IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity 2001, 11:669-672.
2. Baayen R.H., Davidson D.J., Bates D.M. Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59:390-412.
3. Baayen R.H., Wurm L.H., Aycock J. Lexical dynamics for low-frequency complex words: A regression study across tasks and modalities. The Mental Lexicon 2007, 2:419-463.
4. Balling L.W., Baayen R.H. Morphological effects in auditory word recognition: Evidence from Danish. Language and Cognitive Processes 2008, 23:1159-1190.
5. Balling L.W., Baayen R.H. Probability and surprisal in auditory comprehension of morphologically complex words. Cognition 2012.
6. Balota D.A., Yap M.J., Hutchison K.A., Cortese M.J., Kessler B., Loftis B., et al. The English lexicon project. Behavior Research Methods 2007, 39:445-459.
7. Barr D.J., Levy R., Scheepers C., Tily H.J. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 2013, 68:255-278.
8. Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes (Version 0.999999-0).
9. Brainard D.H. The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision 1997, 10:433-436.
10. 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, 41:977-990.
11. Butterworth B. Lexical representation. Language production 1983, Vol. 2. Academic Press, London.
12. Dale A.M., Liu A.K., Fischl B.R., Buckner R.L., Belliveau J.W., Lewine J.D., et al. Dynamic statistical parametric mapping: Combining fMRI and MEG for high-resolution imaging of cortical activity. Neuron 2000, 26:55-67.
13. Dale A.M., Sereno M.I. Improved localization of cortical activity by combining EEG and MEG with MRI cortical surface reconstruction: A linear approach. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1993, 5:162-176.
14. Desikan R.S., Ségonne F., Fischl B., Quinn B.T., Dickerson B.C., Blacker D., et al. An automated labeling system for subdividing the human cerebral cortex on MRI scans into gyral based regions of interest. Neuroimage 2006, 31:968-980.
15. Fiorentino R., Poeppel D. Compound words and structure in the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 2007, 22:953-1000.
16. Fiorentino R., Poeppel D. Processing of compound words: An MEG study. Brain and Language 2007, 103:18-19.
17. Gagnepain P., Henson R.N., Davis M.H. Temporal predictive codes for spoken words in auditory cortex. Current Biology 2012, 22:615-621.
18. Hale, J. (2001). A probabilistic earley parser as a psycholinguistic model. Paper presented at the proceedings of the second meeting of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics on language technologies.
19. Hämäläinen M., Hari R., Ilmoniemi R.J., Knuutila J., Lounasmaa O.V. Magnetoencephalography-theory, instrumentation, and applications to noninvasive studies of the working human brain. Reviews of Modern Physics 1993, 65:413.
20. Ji H., Gagné C.L., Spalding T.L. Benefits and costs of lexical decomposition and semantic integration during the processing of transparent and opaque English compounds. Journal of Memory and Language 2011, 65:406-430.
21. Kouider S., Dupoux E. Episodic accessibility and morphological processing: Evidence from long-term auditory priming. Acta Psychologica 2009, 130:38-47.
22. Linzen T., Marantz A., Pylkkänen L. Syntactic context effects in visual word recognition: An MEG study. The Mental Lexicon 2013, 8(2).
23. Maris E., Oostenveld R. Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG-and MEG-data. Journal of Neuroscience Methods 2007, 164:177-190.
24. Marr D. Vision 1982, W.H. Freeman, San Francisco.
25. Marslen-Wilson W.D. Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition. Cognition 1987, 25:71-102.
26. Marslen-Wilson W., Tyler L.K., Waksler R., Older L. Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. Psychological Review 1994, 101:3-33.
27. Marslen-Wilson W.D., Welsh A. Processing interactions and lexical access during word recognition in continuous speech. Cognitive Psychology 1978, 10:29-63.
28. McClelland J.L., Elman J.L. The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology 1986, 18:1-86.
29. Norris D., McQueen J. Shortlist B: A Bayesian model of continuous speech recognition. Psychological Review 2008, 115:357-395.
30. Oldfield R.C. The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 1971, 9:97-113.
31. Pelli D.G. The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision 1997, 10:437-442.
32. Pinheiro J.C., Bates D.M. Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS 2000, Springer, New York.
33. R Core Team R: A language and environment for statistical computing 2012, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
34. Rastle K., Davis M.H., New B. The broth in my brother's brothel: Morpho-orthographic segmentation in visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2004, 11:1090-1098.
35. Solomyak O., Marantz A. Lexical access in early stages of visual word processing: A single-trial correlational MEG study of heteronym recognition. Brain and Language 2009, 108:191-196.
36. Solomyak O., Marantz A. Evidence for early morphological decomposition in visual word recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2010, 22:2042-2057.
37. Taft M. Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2004, 57A:745-765.
38. Taft M., Forster K.I. Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1975, 14:638-647.
39. Todorovic A., de Lange F.P. Repetition suppression and expectation suppression are dissociable in time in early auditory evoked fields. The Journal of Neuroscience 2012, 32:13389-13395.
40. Wurm L.H. Auditory processing of prefixed English words is both continuous and decompositional. Journal of Memory and Language 1997, 37:438-461.
41. Wurm L.H., Ernestus M.T., Schreuder R., Baayen R.H. Dynamics of the auditory comprehension of prefixed words: Cohort entropies and conditional root uniqueness points. The Mental Lexicon 2006, 1:125-146.
42. Yuan J., Liberman M. Speaker identification on the SCOTUS corpus. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2008, 123.