Literature DB >> 20955801

Monitoring in language perception: electrophysiological and hemodynamic responses to spelling violations.

Nan van de Meerendonk1, Peter Indefrey, Dorothee J Chwilla, Herman H J Kolk.   

Abstract

The monitoring theory of language perception proposes that competing representations that are caused by strong expectancy violations can trigger a conflict which elicits reprocessing of the input to check for possible processing errors. This monitoring process is thought to be reflected by the P600 component in the EEG. The present study further investigated this monitoring process by comparing syntactic and spelling violations in an EEG and an fMRI experiment. To assess the effect of conflict strength, misspellings were embedded in sentences that were weakly or strongly predictive of a critical word. In support of the monitoring theory, syntactic and spelling violations elicited similarly distributed P600 effects. Furthermore, the P600 effect was larger to misspellings in the strongly compared to the weakly predictive sentences. The fMRI results showed that both syntactic and spelling violations increased activation in the left inferior frontal gyrus (lIFG), while only the misspellings activated additional areas. Conflict strength did not affect the hemodynamic response to spelling violations. These results extend the idea that the lIFG is involved in implementing cognitive control in the presence of representational conflicts in general to the processing of errors in language perception.
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20955801     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.10.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroimage        ISSN: 1053-8119            Impact factor:   6.556


  14 in total

1.  Beta oscillations reflect memory and motor aspects of spoken word production.

Authors:  Vitória Piai; Ardi Roelofs; Joost Rommers; Eric Maris
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  The dynamic influence of emotional words on sentence processing.

Authors:  Jinfeng Ding; Lin Wang; Yufang Yang
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.282

3.  Lack of selectivity for syntax relative to word meanings throughout the language network.

Authors:  Evelina Fedorenko; Idan Asher Blank; Matthew Siegelman; Zachary Mineroff
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2020-06-20

4.  Do Morphemes Matter when Reading Compound Words with Transposed Letters? Evidence from Eye-Tracking and Event-Related Potentials.

Authors:  Mallory C Stites; Kara D Federmeier; Kiel Christianson
Journal:  Lang Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2016-08-06       Impact factor: 2.331

5.  Combining Different Tools for EEG Analysis to Study the Distributed Character of Language Processing.

Authors:  Armando Freitas da Rocha; Flávia Benevides Foz; Alfredo Pereira
Journal:  Comput Intell Neurosci       Date:  2015-12-02

6.  Prediction of turn-ends based on anticipation of upcoming words.

Authors:  Lilla Magyari; J P de Ruiter
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-10-01

7.  CNTNAP2 and language processing in healthy individuals as measured with ERPs.

Authors:  Miriam Kos; Danielle van den Brink; Tineke M Snijders; Mark Rijpkema; Barbara Franke; Guillen Fernandez; Peter Hagoort
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Functional language shift to the right hemisphere in patients with language-eloquent brain tumors.

Authors:  Sandro M Krieg; Nico Sollmann; Theresa Hauck; Sebastian Ille; Annette Foerschler; Bernhard Meyer; Florian Ringel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Cortical dynamics of semantic processing during sentence comprehension: evidence from event-related optical signals.

Authors:  Jian Huang; Suiping Wang; Shiwei Jia; Deyuan Mo; Hsuan-Chih Chen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  A time and place for language comprehension: mapping the N400 and the P600 to a minimal cortical network.

Authors:  Harm Brouwer; John C J Hoeks
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2013-11-12       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.