46
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      When does word frequency influence written production?

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The aim of the present study was to explore the central (e.g., lexical processing) and peripheral processes (motor preparation and execution) underlying word production during typewriting. To do so, we tested non-professional typers in a picture typing task while continuously recording EEG. Participants were instructed to write (by means of a standard keyboard) the corresponding name for a given picture. The lexical frequency of the words was manipulated: half of the picture names were of high-frequency while the remaining were of low-frequency. Different measures were obtained: (1) first keystroke latency and (2) keystroke latency of the subsequent letters and duration of the word. Moreover, ERPs locked to the onset of the picture presentation were analyzed to explore the temporal course of word frequency in typewriting. The results showed an effect of word frequency for the first keystroke latency but not for the duration of the word or the speed to which letter were typed (interstroke intervals). The electrophysiological results showed the expected ERP frequency effect at posterior sites: amplitudes for low-frequency words were more positive than those for high-frequency words. However, relative to previous evidence in the spoken modality, the frequency effect appeared in a later time-window. These results demonstrate two marked differences in the processing dynamics underpinning typing compared to speaking: First, central processing dynamics between speaking and typing differ already in the manner that words are accessed; second, central processing differences in typing, unlike speaking, do not cascade to peripheral processes involved in response execution.

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: a review.

          Recent years have seen an explosion of research on the N2 component of the event-related potential, a negative wave peaking between 200 and 350 ms after stimulus onset. This research has focused on the influence of "cognitive control," a concept that covers strategic monitoring and control of motor responses. However, rich research traditions focus on attention and novelty or mismatch as determinants of N2 amplitude. We focus on paradigms that elicit N2 components with an anterior scalp distribution, namely, cognitive control, novelty, and sequential matching, and argue that the anterior N2 should be divided into separate control- and mismatch-related subcomponents. We also argue that the oddball N2 belongs in the family of attention-related N2 components that, in the visual modality, have a posterior scalp distribution. We focus on the visual modality for which components with frontocentral and more posterior scalp distributions can be readily distinguished.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Electrophysiological correlates of anterior cingulate function in a go/no-go task: effects of response conflict and trial type frequency.

            Neuroimaging and computational modeling studies have led to the suggestion that response conflict monitoring by the anterior cingulate cortex plays a key role in cognitive control. For example, response conflict is high when a response must be withheld (no-go) in contexts in which there is a prepotent tendency to make an overt (go) response. An event-related brain potential (ERP) component, the N2, is more pronounced on no-go than on go trials and was previously thought to reflect the need to inhibit the go response. However, the N2 may instead reflect the high degree of response conflict on no-go trials. If so, an N2 should also be apparent when subjects make a go response in conditions in which no-go events are more common. To test this hypothesis, we collected high-density ERP data from subjects performing a go/no-go task, in which the relative frequency of go versus no-go stimuli was varied. Consistent with our hypothesis, an N2 was apparent on both go and no-go trials and showed the properties expected of an ERP measure of conflict detection on correct trials: (1) It was enhanced for low-frequency stimuli, irrespective of whether these stimuli were associated with generating or suppressing a response, and (2) it was localized to the anterior cingulate cortex. This suggests that previous conceptions of the no-go N2 as indexing response inhibition may be in need of revision. Instead, the results are consistent with the view that the N2 in go/no-go tasks reflects conflict arising from competition between the execution and the inhibition of a single response.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Guidelines for using human event-related potentials to study cognition: recording standards and publication criteria.

              Event-related potentials (ERPs) recorded from the human scalp can provide important information about how the human brain normally processes information and about how this processing may go awry in neurological or psychiatric disorders. Scientists using or studying ERPs must strive to overcome the many technical problems that can occur in the recording and analysis of these potentials. The methods and the results of these ERP studies must be published in a way that allows other scientists to understand exactly what was done so that they can, if necessary, replicate the experiments. The data must then be analyzed and presented in a way that allows different studies to be compared readily. This paper presents guidelines for recording ERPs and criteria for publishing the results.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Front Psychol
                Front Psychol
                Front. Psychol.
                Frontiers in Psychology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-1078
                24 December 2013
                2013
                : 4
                : 963
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Center for Brain and Cognition, Universitat Pompeu Fabra Barcelona, Spain
                [2] 2Laboratoire de Psychology Cognitive, CNRS - Universite Aix-Marseille Marseille, France
                [3] 3Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats Barcelona, Spain
                Author notes

                Edited by: Marieke Longcamp, Aix-Marseille Univserity and CNRS, France

                Reviewed by: John P. Minda, The University of Western Ontario, Canada; Stephanie K. Ries, University of California at Berkeley, USA

                *Correspondence: Cristina Baus, Department de Tecnología, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, C/ Tànger, 122-140, 08018 Barcelona, Spain e-mail: baus.cristina@ 123456gmail.com

                This article was submitted to Cognitive Science, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology.

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00963
                3870946
                23382719
                12ea809c-9310-40c3-bfb7-155e5c6ec4ed
                Copyright © 2013 Baus, Strijkers and Costa.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 15 July 2013
                : 06 December 2013
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 2, Equations: 0, References: 73, Pages: 9, Words: 7512
                Categories
                Psychology
                Original Research Article

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                written word production,typewriting,lexical frequency,central and peripheral processes

                Comments

                Comment on this article