For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
36
views
32
references
 Top references
cited by
1
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      248
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effects of Grammaticality and Morphological Complexity on the P600 Event-Related Potential Component

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          We investigated interactions between morphological complexity and grammaticality on electrophysiological markers of grammatical processing during reading. Our goal was to determine whether morphological complexity and stimulus grammaticality have independent or additive effects on the P600 event-related potential component. Participants read sentences that were either well-formed or grammatically ill-formed, in which the critical word was either morphologically simple or complex. Results revealed no effects of complexity for well-formed stimuli, but the P600 amplitude was significantly larger for morphologically complex ungrammatical stimuli than for morphologically simple ungrammatical stimuli. These findings suggest that some previous work may have inadequately characterized factors related to reanalysis during morphosyntactic processing. Our results show that morphological complexity by itself does not elicit P600 effects. However, in ungrammatical circumstances, overt morphology provides a more robust and reliable cue to morphosyntactic relationships than null affixation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

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

          An integrated theory of language production and comprehension.

          Martin Pickering, Simon Garrod (2013)
          Currently, production and comprehension are regarded as quite distinct in accounts of language processing. In rejecting this dichotomy, we instead assert that producing and understanding are interwoven, and that this interweaving is what enables people to predict themselves and each other. We start by noting that production and comprehension are forms of action and action perception. We then consider the evidence for interweaving in action, action perception, and joint action, and explain such evidence in terms of prediction. Specifically, we assume that actors construct forward models of their actions before they execute those actions, and that perceivers of others' actions covertly imitate those actions, then construct forward models of those actions. We use these accounts of action, action perception, and joint action to develop accounts of production, comprehension, and interactive language. Importantly, they incorporate well-defined levels of linguistic representation (such as semantics, syntax, and phonology). We show (a) how speakers and comprehenders use covert imitation and forward modeling to make predictions at these levels of representation, (b) how they interweave production and comprehension processes, and (c) how they use these predictions to monitor the upcoming utterances. We show how these accounts explain a range of behavioral and neuroscientific data on language processing and discuss some of the implications of our proposal.
          Article 0 comments Cited 282 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Thinking ahead: the role and roots of prediction in language comprehension.

            Kara Federmeier (2007)
            Reviewed are studies using event-related potentials to examine when and how sentence context information is used during language comprehension. Results suggest that, when it can, the brain uses context to predict features of likely upcoming items. However, although prediction seems important for comprehension, it also appears susceptible to age-related deterioration and can be associated with processing costs. The brain may address this trade-off by employing multiple processing strategies, distributed across the two cerebral hemispheres. In particular, left hemisphere language processing seems to be oriented toward prediction and the use of top-down cues, whereas right hemisphere comprehension is more bottom-up, biased toward the veridical maintenance of information. Such asymmetries may arise, in turn, because language comprehension mechanisms are integrated with language production mechanisms only in the left hemisphere (the PARLO framework).
            Article 0 comments Cited 137 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Multiple effects of sentential constraint on word processing.

              Edward Wlotko, Marta Kutas, Esmeralda Ochoa … (2007)
              Behavioral and electrophysiological studies have uncovered different patterns of constraint effects on the processing of words in sentences. Whereas response time measures have indicated a reduced scope of facilitation from strongly constraining contexts, event-related brain potential (ERP) measures have instead revealed enhanced facilitation for semantically related endings in such sentences. Given this disparity, and the concomitant possibility of functionally separable stages of context effects, the current study jointly examined expectancy (cloze probability) and constraint effects on the ERP response to words. Expected and unexpected (but plausible) words completed strongly and weakly constraining sentences; unexpected items were matched for contextual fit across the two levels of constraint and were semantically unrelated to the most expected endings. N400 amplitudes were graded by expectancy but unaffected by constraint and seemed to index the benefit of contextual information. However, a later effect, in the form of increased frontal positivity from 500 to 900 ms post-stimulus-onset, indicated a possible cost associated with the processing of unexpected words in strongly constraining contexts.
              Article 0 comments Cited 96 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Benjamin Xu: Role: Editor
                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): PLoS One
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): PLoS ONE
                Journal ID (publisher-id): plos
                Journal ID (pmc): plosone
                Title: PLoS ONE
                Publisher: Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                ISSN (Electronic): 1932-6203
                Publication date (Electronic): 21 October 2015
                Publication date Collection: 2015
                Volume: 10
                Issue: 10
                Electronic Location Identifier: e0140850
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Program in Neuroscience, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America
                [2 ]Department of Linguistics, Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, Neuroscience Program, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign-Urbana, Illinois, United States of America
                [3 ]Department of Psychology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America
                The National Institutes of Health, UNITED STATES
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: ASM DT GDV. Performed the experiments: ASM EKW. Analyzed the data: ASM. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: LO. Wrote the paper: ASM DT LO.

                Article
                Publisher ID: PONE-D-15-19031
                DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140850
                PMC ID: 4619296
                PubMed ID: 26488893
                SO-VID: e69f0dd6-c6ee-4ff0-b7d3-6961210a2a8a
                Copyright statement: Copyright @ 2015
                License:

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

                History
                Date received : 14 May 2015
                Date accepted : 1 October 2015
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 2, Pages: 16
                Funding
                The authors received no funding specifically designated for this work. Portions of this research were conducted while ASM was supported by National Institutes of Health ( http://www.nih.gov/) grant F31 DC013700 and National Institutes of Health grant T32 DC005361, while DT was supported by National Science Foundation ( http://www.nsf.gov/) grant BCS-1349110 and National Science Foundation grant BCS-1431324, and while LO was supported by National Science Foundation grant BCS-1261501. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Subject: Research Article
                Custom metadata
                Data Availability All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Uncategorized
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content248

                See all similar

                Cited by1

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors295

                See all reference authors