Never seem to find the time: Evaluating the physiological time course of visual word recognition with regression analysis of single-item event-related potentials

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

Volumn 29, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 642-661

  Laszlo, Sarah ^a   Federmeier, Kara D ^b  

^a BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

ERPs; Multiple regression; Visual word recognition

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; ELECTROOCULOGRAPHY; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PREDICTION; SEMANTICS; STIMULUS; WAVEFORM; WORD RECOGNITION;

EID: 84904890412     PISSN: 23273798     EISSN: 23273801     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01690965.2013.866259     Document Type: Article

References (110)

1. Amsel, B. D. (2011). Tracking real-time neural activation of conceptual knowledge using single-trial event-related potentials. Neuropsychologia, 49, 970–983. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.01.003
2. Amsel, B. D., Urbach, T. P., & Kutas, M. (2013). Alive and grasping: Stable and rapid semantic access to an object category but not object graspability. NeuroImage, 77, 1–13.
3. Anderson, M. J. (2001). Permutation tests for univariate or multivariate analysis of variance and regression. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 58, 626–639. doi:10.1139/f01-004
4. Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H., & Yap, M. J. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 283–316. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.133.2.283
5. Balota, D. A., & Yap, M. J. (2006). 10 Attentional control and the flexible lexical processor: Explorations of the magic moment of word recognition. In Sally Andrews (Ed.), From inkmarks to ideas: Current issues in lexical processing, 229. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
6. Barber, H. A., Doñamayor, N., Kutas, M., & Münte, T. (2010). Parafoveal N400 effect during sentence reading. Neuroscience Letters, 479(2), 152–156. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2010.05.053
7. Barber, H. A., Ben-Zvi, S., Bentin, S., & Kutas, M. (2011). Parafoveal perception during sentence reading? An ERP paradigm using rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) with flankers. Psychophysiology, 48(4), 523–531. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01082.x
8. Barrett, S. E., & Rugg, M. D. (1990). Event-related potentials and the semantic matching of pictures. Brain and Cognition, 14, 201–212. doi:10.1016/0278-2626(90)90029-N
9. Blair, R. C., & Karniski, W. (1993). An alternative method for significance testing of waveform difference potentials. Psychophysiology, 30, 518–524. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1993.tb02075.x
10. Carreiras, M., Andoni Dunabeitia, J., & Molinaro, N. (2009). Consonants and vowels contribute differently to visual word recognition: ERPs of relative position priming. Cerebral Cortex, 19, 2659–2670. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp019
11. Carreiras, M., Perea, M., Vergara, M., & Pollatsek, A. (2009). The time course of orthography and phonology: ERP correlates of masked priming effects in Spanish. Psychophysiology, 46(5), 1113–1122.
12. Carreiras, M., Vergara, M., & Perea, M. (2009). ERP correlates of transposed-letter priming effects: The role of vowels versus consonants. Psychophysiology, 46(1), 34–42.
13. Chauncey, K., Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J. (2008). Effects of stimulus font and size on masked repetition priming: An ERP investigation. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 183–200. doi:10.1080/01690960701579839
14. Christianson, K., Williams, C. C., Zacks, R. T., & Ferreira, F. (2006). Younger and older adults’ “good-enough” interpretations of garden-path sentences. Discourse Processes, 42, 205–238. doi:10.1207/s15326950dp4202_6
15. Clark, V. P., Fan, S., & Hillyard, S. A. (1994). Identification of early visual evoked potential generators by retinotopic and topographic analyses. Human Brain Mapping, 2, 170–187. doi:10.1002/hbm.460020306
16. Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC psycholinguistic database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 497–505.
17. Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, J., & Besner, D. (1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention & performance IV (pp. 535–555). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Dambacher, M., Dimigen, O., Braun, M., Wille, K., Jacobs, A. M., & Kliegl, R. (2012). Stimulus onset asynchrony and the timeline of word recognition: Event-related potentials during sentence reading. Neuropsychologia, 50, 1852–1870. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.04.011
19. Dambacher, M., & Kliegl, R. (2007). Synchronizing timelines: Relations between fixation durations and N400 amplitudes during sentence reading. Brain Research, 1155, 147–162. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2007.04.027
20. Dambacher, M., Kliegl, R., Hoffman, M., & Jacobs, A.M. (2006). Frequency and predictability effects on event-related potentials during reading. Brain Research, 1084, 89–103. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.02.010
21. Deacon, D., Dynowska, A., Ritter, W., & Grose-Fifer, J. (2004). Repetition and semantic priming of nonwords: Implications for theories of N400 and word recognition. Psychophysiology, 41, 60–74.
22. Delong, K.A., Urbach, T. P., & Kutas, M. (2005). Probabilisticword pre-activation during language comprehension inferred from electrical brain activity. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 1117–1121. doi:10.1038/nn1504
23. Dikker, S., Rabagliati, H., & Pylkkanen, L. (2009). Sensitivity to syntax in visual cortex. Cognition, 110, 293–321. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.09.008
24. Dimigen, O., Kliegl, R., & Sommer, W. (2012). Trans-saccadic parafoveal preview benefits in fluent reading: A study with fixation-related brain potentials. NeuroImage, 62, 381–393. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.04.006
25. Dimigen, O., Sommer, W., Hohlfield, A., Jacobs, A. M., & Kliegl, R. (2011). Coregrestriation of eye movements and EEG in natural reading: Analyses and review. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 552–572. doi:10.1037/a0023885
26. Di Russo, F., Martínez, A., Sereno, M. I., Pitzalis, S., & Hillyard, S. A. (2002). Cortical sources of the early components of the visual evoked potential. Human Brain Mapping, 15, 95–111. doi:10.1002/hbm.10010
27. Dufau, S., Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2008). An ERP investigation of location invariance in masked repetition priming. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 8, 222–228. doi:10.3758/CABN.8.2.222
28. Embick, D., Hackl, M., Schaeffer, J., Kelepir, M., & Marantz, A. (2001). A magnetoencephalographic component whose latency reflects lexical frequency. Cognitive Brain Research, 10, 345–348. doi:10.1016/S0926-6410(00)00053-7
29. Engbert, R., Nuthmann, A., & Richter, E. Kliegl. R. (2005). SWIFT: A dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. Psychological Review, 112, 777–813.
30. Federmeier, K. D., & Kutas, M. (1999). A rose by any other name: Long-term memory structure and sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 469–495. doi:10.1006/jmla.1999.2660
31. Federmeier, K. D., Kutas, M., & Dickson, D. S. (in press). A common neural progression to meaning in about a third of a second. In G. S. Hickok & S. L. Small (Eds.), Neurobiology of language. Holland: Elsevier.
32. Federmeier, K. D., Mai, H., & Kutas, M. (2005). Both sides get the point: Bihemispheric sensitivity to sentential constraint. Memory and Cognition, 33, 871–886. doi:10.3758/BF03193082
33. Forster, K. I. (1989). Basic issues in lexical processing. In W. D. Marslen-Wilson (Ed.), Lexical representation and process (pp. 75–107). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
34. Freedman, D., & Lane, D. (1983). A nonstochastic interpretation of reported significance levels. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 1, 292–298.
35. Ganis, G., & Kutas, M. (2003). An electrophysiological study of scene effects on object identification. Cognitive Brain Research, 16, 123–144. doi:10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00244-6
36. Ganis, G., Kutas, M., & Sereno, M. I. (1996). The search for “common sense”: An electrophysiological study of the comprehension of words and pictures in reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8(2), 89–106. doi:10.1162/jocn.1996.8.2.89
37. Gaskell, M. G., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1997). Integrating form and meaning: A distributed model of speech perception. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 613–656. doi:10.1080/016909697386646
38. Gouvea, A.C., Phillips, C., Kazanina, N., & Poeppel, D. (2010). The linguistic processes underlying the P600. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25, 149–188. doi:10.1080/01690960902965951
39. Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2009). Watching the word go by: On the time-course of component processes in visual word recognition. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3, 128–156. doi:10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00121.x
40. Grainger, J., Kiyonaga, K., & Holcomb, P. J. (2006). The time course of orthographic and phonological code activation. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1021–1026.
41. Gunter, T. C., Friederici, A. D., & Hahne, A. (1999). Brain responses during sentence reading: Visual input affects central processes. NeuroReport, 10(15), 3175–3178.
42. Halgren, E., Dhond, R. P., Christensen, N., Van Petten, C., Marinkovic, K., Lewine, J. D., & Dale, A. M. (2002). N400-like magnetoencephalography responses modulated by semantic context, word frequency, and lexical class in sentences. Neuroimage, 17(3), 1101–1116.
43. Hauk, O., Coutout, C., Holden, A., & Chen, Y. (2012). The timecourse of single-word reading: Evidence from fast behavioral and brain responses. NeuroImage, 60, 1462–1477. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.01.061
44. Hauk, O., Davis, M. H., Ford, M., Pulvermüller, F., & Marslen- Wilson, W. D. (2006). The time course of visual word recognition as revealed by linear regression analysis of ERP data. NeuroImage, 30, 1383–1400. doi:10.1016/j.neuro image.2005.11.048
45. Hauk, O., & Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Effects of word length and frequency on the human event-related potential. Clinical Neurophysiology, 115, 1090–1103. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2003.12.020
46. Hauk, O., Pulvermuller, F., Ford, M., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Davis, M. H. (2009). Can I have a quick word? Early electrophysiological manifestations of psycholinguistic processes revealed by event-related regression analysis of the EEG. Biological Psychology, 80, 64–74. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2008.04.015
47. Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J. (2006). On the time course of visual word recognition: An event-related potential investigation using masked repetition priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(10), 1631–1643. doi:10.1162/jocn.2006.18.10.1631
48. Holcomb, P. J., Grainger, J., & O’Rourke, T. (2002). An electrophysiological study of the effects of orthographic neighborhood size on printed word perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 938–950.
49. Holcomb, P. J., Kounios, J., Anderson, J. E., & West, W. C. (1999). Dual-coding, context-availability, and concreteness effects in sentence comprehension: an electrophysiological investigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 721–742. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.25.3.721
50. King, J. W., & Kutas, M. (1998). Neural plasticity in the dynamics of human visual word recognition. Neuroscience Letters, 244(2), 61–64.
51. Kliegl, R., Dambacher, M., Dimigen, O., Jacobs, A. M., & Sommer, W. (2012). Eye movements and brain electric potentials during reading. Psychological Research, 76, 145–158. doi:10.1007/s00426-011-0376-x
52. Kiyonaga, K., Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J. (2007). Masked cross-modal repetition priming: An ERP investigation. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22, 337–376. doi:10.1080/01690960600652471
53. Kounios, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (1994). Concreteness effects in semantic processing: ERP evidence supporting dual-coding theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(4), 804–823. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.20.4.804
54. Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2000). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Science, 4, 463–470.
55. Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 621–647. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.131123
56. Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Event-related brain potentials to semantically inappropriate and surprisingly large words. Biological Psychology, 11, 99–116.
57. Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1983). Event-related brain potentials to grammatical errors and semantic anomalies. Memory & Cognition, 11, 539–550.
58. Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207, 203–205.
59. Laszlo, S. (2011). What goes up, must come down: Multiple regression analysis of single-item ERPs reveals yoked oscillation of orthographic and semantic processing. Psychophysiology, 48, S43. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01058.x
60. Laszlo, S., & Federmeier, K. D. (2007). Better the DVL you know: Acronyms reveal the contribution of familiarity to single word reading, Psychological Science, 18, 122–126.
61. Laszlo, S., & Federmeier, K. D. (2008). Minding the PS, queues, and PXQs: Uniformity of semantic processing across multiple stimulus types. Psychophysiology, 45, 458–466. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00636.x
62. Laszlo, S., & Federmeier, K. D. (2009). A beautiful day in the neighborhood: An event-related potential study of lexical relationships and prediction in context. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 326–338. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.06.004
63. Laszlo, S., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). The N400 as a snapshot of interactive processing: evidence from regression analyses of orthographic neighbor and lexical associate effects. Psychophysiology, 48, 176–186. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01058.x
64. Laszlo, S., & Plaut, D. C. (2012). A neurally plausible parallel distributed processing model of event-related potential word reading data. Brain and Language, 120, 271–281. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2011.09.001
65. Laszlo, S., Stites, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2012). Won’t get fooled again: An event-related potential study of task and repetition effects on the semantic processing of items without semantics. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 257–274. doi:10.1080/01690965.2011.606667
66. Lau, E. F., Phillips, C., & Poeppel, D. (2008). A cortical network for semantics (de)constructing the N400. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9, 920–933.
67. Lee, C., & Federmeier, K. D. (2009). Wave-ering: An ERP study of syntactic and semantic context effects on ambiguity resolution for noun/verb homographs. Journal of Memory and Language, 61(4), 538–555.
68. Marcus, M., Santorini, B., & Marcinkiewicz, M. (1993). Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics, 19, 313–330.
69. Massol, S., Grainger, J., Dufau, S., & Holcomb, P. (2010). Masked priming from orthographic neighbors: An ERP investigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(1), 162.
70. Massol, S., Grainger, J., Midgley, K. J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2012). Masked repetition priming of letter-in-string identification: An ERP investigation. Brain Research.
71. Massol, S., Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J. (2011). When less is more: Feedback, priming, and the pseudoword superiority effect. Brain research, 1386, 153–164.
72. Medler, D. A., & Binder, J. R. (2005). MCWord: An on-line orthographic database of the English language. Retrieved from http://www.neuro.mcw.edu/mcword/
73. Münte, T. F., Wieringa, B. M., Weyerts, H., Szentkuti, A., Matzke, M., & Johannes, S. (2001). Differences in brain potentials to open and closed class words: class and frequency effects. Neuropsychologia, 39(1), 91–102.
74. Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., & Schreiber, T. A. (1998). The University of South Florida word association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. Retrieved from: http://usf.edu/FreeAssociation/
75. Norris, D. (2006). The Bayesian reader: Explaining word recognition as an optimal Bayesian decision process. Psychological Review, 113, 327–357. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.113.2.327
76. Osterhout, L., Bersick, M., & McKinnon, R. (1997). Brain potentials elicited by words: word length and frequency predict the latency of an early negativity. Biological Psychology, 46(2), 143–168.
77. Paller, K. A., Gonsalves, B., Grabowecky, M., Bozic, V. S., & Yamada, S. (2000). Electrophysiological correlates of recollecting faces of known and unknown individuals. Neuroimage, 11(2), 98–110. doi:10.1006/nimg.1999.0521
78. Petit, J. P., Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J. (2006). On the time course of letter perception: A masked priming ERP investigation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(4), 674–681.
79. Polich, J. (2007). Updating P300: An integrative theory of P3a and P3b. Clinical Neurophysiology: Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology, 118 (10), 2128. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2007.04.019
80. Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1990). Eye movements and lexical access in reading. In D. A. Balota, G. B. Flores d’Arcais, & K. Rayner, Comprehension processes in reading (pp 143–163). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
81. Pollatsek, A., Reichle, E. D., & Rayner, K. (2006). Tests of the E-Z Reader model: Exploring the interface between cognition and eye-movement control. Cognitive Psychology, 52, 1–56. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.06.001
82. Princeton University. (2010). About WordNet. Retrieved from http://wordnet.princeton.edu
83. Pulvermuller, F. (1999). Words in the brain’s language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 253–336. doi:10.1017/S0140525X9900182X
84. Pylkkänen, L., & Marantz, A. (2003). Tracking the time course of word recognition with MEG. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 187–189. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00092-5
85. Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1457–1506. doi:10.1080/17470210902816461
86. Rayner, K., & Clifton, C. (2009). Language processing in reading and speech perception is fast and incremental: Implications for event-related potential research. Biological Psychology, 80, 4–9. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2008.05.002
87. Rayner, K., & Duffy, S. A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition, 14, 191–201. doi:10.3758/BF03197692
88. Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D. L., & Rayner, K. (1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review, 105, 125–157. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.105.1.125
89. Reichle, E., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2012a). Eye movements in reading versus nonreading tasks: Using E-Z Reader to understand the role of word/stimulus familiarity. Visual Cognition, 20, 360–390. doi:10.1080/13506285.2012.667006
90. Reichle, E., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2012b). Using E-Z reader to simulate eye movements in nonreading tasks: A unified framework for understanding the eye-mind link. Psychological Review, 119, 155–185. doi:10.1037/a0026473
91. Reichle, E., Tokowicz, N., Liu, Y., & Perfetti, C. A. (2011). Testing an assumption of the E-Z Reader model of eyemovement control during reading: Using event-related potentials to examine the familiarity check. Psychophysiology, 48, 993–1003. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2011.01169.x
92. Rohde, D. L. T., Gonnerman, L., & Plaut, D. C. (Under Review). An improved model of semantic similarity based on lexical co-occurrence. Cognitive Science.
93. Rossion, B., & Caharel, S. (2011). ERP evidence for the speed of face categorization in the human brain: Disentangling the contribution of low-level visual cues from face perception. Vision Research, 51, 1297–1311. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2011.04.003
94. Rossion, B., & Jacques, C. (2008). Does physical interstimulus variance account for early electrophysiological face sensitive responses in the human brain? Ten lessons on the N170. NeuroImage, 39, 1959–1979. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.10.011
95. Rossion, B., & Jacques, C. (2011). The N170: Understanding the time-course of face perception in the human brain. In S. J. Luck & E. S. Kappenman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of ERP components (pp. 115–142). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
96. Rugg, M. D. (1990). Event-related brain potentials dissociate repetition effects of high- and low-frequency words. Memory and Cognition, 18, 367–379. doi:10.3758/BF03197126
97. Rugg, M.D., & Nagy, M.E. (1987). Lexical contribution ot nonword repetition effects: Evidence from event-related potentials. Memory & Cognition, 15, 473–481.
98. Schendan, H. E., Ganis, G., & Kutas, M. (1998). Neurophysiological evidence for visual perceptual categorization of words and faces within 150 ms. Psychophysiology, 35, 240–251. doi:10.1111/1469-8986.3530240
99. Schendan, H. E., & Kutas, M. (2007). Neurophysiological evidence for transfer appropriate processing of memory: Processing versus feature similarity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 612–619. doi:10.3758/BF03196810
100. Schweinberger, S. R., Pickering, E. C., Jentzsch, I., Burton, A. M., & Kaufmann, J. M. (2002). Event-related brain potential evidence for a response of inferior temporal cortex to familiar face repetitions. Cognitive Brain Research, 14(3), 398–409. doi:10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00142-8
101. Segalowitz, S. J., & Zheng, X. (2009). An ERP study of category priming: evidence of early lexical semantic access. Biological psychology, 80(1), 122–129.
102. Sereno, S. C., & Rayner, K. (2003). Measuring word recognition in reading: Eye movements and event-related potentials. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 489–493. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2003.09.010
103. Sereno, S. C., Rayner, K., & Posner, M. I. (1998). Establishing a time-line of word recognition: evidence from eye movements and event-related potentials. NeuroReport, 9, 2195–2200. doi:10.1097/00001756-199807130-00009
104. Simon, D. A., Lewis, G., & Marantz, A. (2012). Disambiguating form and lexical frequency effects in MEG responses using homonyms. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 275–287. doi:10.1080/01690965.2011.607712
105. Van Petten, C., & Kutas, M. (1990). Interactions between sentence context and word frequency in event-related brain potentials. Memory & Cognition, 18, 380–393.
106. VanRullen, R., & Thorpe, S. J. (2001). The time course of visual processing: From early perception to decision making. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13, 454–461. doi:10.1046/j.1460-9568.1999.00531.x
107. Vergara-Martínez, M., Perea, M., Marín, A., & Carreiras, M. (2011). The processing of consonants and vowels during letter identity and letter position assignment in visual-word recognition: An ERP study. Brain and language, 118(3), 105–117.
108. West, W. C., & Holcomb, P. J. (2000). Imaginal, semantic, and surface-level processing of concrete and abstract words: an electrophysiological investigation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(6), 1024–1037. doi:10.1162/08989290051137558
109. Wlotko, E. W., & Federmeier, K. D. (2007). Finding the right word: Hemispheric asymmetries in the use of sentence context information. Neuropsychologia, 45, 3001–3014. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.05.013
110. Young, M. P., & Rugg, M. D. (1992). Word Frequency and Multiple Repetition as Determinants of the Modulation of Event-Related Potentials in a Semantic Classification Task. Psychophysiology, 29(6), 664–676.