Literature DB >> 16908058

Hemispheric differences in strong versus weak semantic priming: evidence from event-related brain potentials.

Gwen A Frishkoff1.   

Abstract

GOALS: Research with lateralized word presentation has suggested that strong ("close") and weak ("remote") semantic associates are processed differently in the left and right cerebral hemispheres [e.g., Beeman, M. j., & Chiarello, C. (1998). Complementary right- and left-hemisphere language comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(1), 2-8]. Recently, this hypothesis has been challenged [Coney, J. (2002). The effect of associative strength on priming in the cerebral hemispheres. Brain and Cognition, 50(2), 234-241]. We predicted that foveal presentation of strong and weak associates would elicit different patterns of hemispheric activity, as indexed by high-density event-related brain potentials (ERPs), and that source localization of the scalp potentials would help clarify the nature of hemispheric contributions to semantic organization.
METHODS: 128-channel ERPs were recorded in two experiments as subjects performed a lexical decision task. Word trials were equally divided into strongly related, weakly related, and unrelated word pairs. All words were foveally presented. SOA was 800 ms in Experiment 1, and 200 ms in Experiment 2.
RESULTS: Topographic analyses revealed medial frontal (MFN) and parietal (N400/LPC) effects for both strong and weak associates. Between approximately 450 and 550 ms, the magnitude of the N400/LPC effect indicated priming for both strong and weak associates over left parietal sites, while priming over right parietal sites was restricted to strongly related word pairs. During this interval, spatiotemporal source modeling showed that these scalp effects were best accounted for by ipsilateral sources in the medial temporal lobe. The observed pattern of asymmetries for strong versus weak associates is not consistent with certain proposals regarding the complementarity of right- and left-hemisphere contributions to semantics. It is, however, consistent with findings from visual half-field studies (Hasbrooke and Chiarello, 1998). We discuss the relevance of these results for theories of hemispheric asymmetry and meta-control in lexical semantic access.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16908058     DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2006.06.117

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Lang        ISSN: 0093-934X            Impact factor:   2.381


  16 in total

1.  Using ontology databases for scalable query answering, inconsistency detection, and data integration.

Authors:  Paea Lependu; Dejing Dou
Journal:  J Intell Inf Syst       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.888

2.  Linguistic and Non-Linguistic Semantic Processing in Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders: An ERP Study.

Authors:  Emily L Coderre; Mariya Chernenok; Barry Gordon; Kerry Ledoux
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2017-03

3.  Dynamics of the semantic priming shift: behavioral experiments and cortical network model.

Authors:  Frédéric Lavigne; Laurent Dumercy; Lucile Chanquoy; Brunissende Mercier; Françoise Vitu-Thibault
Journal:  Cogn Neurodyn       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 5.082

4.  Semantic integration by pattern priming: experiment and cortical network model.

Authors:  Frédéric Lavigne; Dominique Longrée; Damon Mayaffre; Sylvie Mellet
Journal:  Cogn Neurodyn       Date:  2016-09-17       Impact factor: 5.082

5.  Impairment of homonymous processing in Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Massimo Piccirilli; Patrizia D'Alessandro; Norma Micheletti; Sara Macone; Laura Scarponi; Paola Arcelli; Stefania Maria Petrillo; Mauro Silvestrini; Simona Luzzi
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2015-01-30       Impact factor: 3.307

6.  Automatic semantic priming abnormalities in schizophrenia.

Authors:  Daniel H Mathalon; Brian J Roach; Judith M Ford
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  2009-12-06       Impact factor: 2.997

7.  Word-to-text integration: Message level and lexical level influences in ERPs.

Authors:  Joseph Z Stafura; Charles A Perfetti
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 3.139

8.  Lexical quality in the brain: ERP evidence for robust word learning from context.

Authors:  Gwen A Frishkoff; Charles A Perfetti; Kevyn Collins-Thompson
Journal:  Dev Neuropsychol       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.253

9.  ERP measures of partial semantic knowledge: left temporal indices of skill differences and lexical quality.

Authors:  Gwen A Frishkoff; Charles A Perfetti; Chris Westbury
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2008-05-13       Impact factor: 3.251

10.  FN400 and LPC memory effects for concrete and abstract words.

Authors:  Paweł Stróżak; Christopher W Bird; Krystin Corby; Gwen Frishkoff; Tim Curran
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 4.016

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.