Cargando…

Electrophysiological response to omitted stimulus in sentence processing

The current study provides evidence that the absence of a syntactically expected item leads to a sustained cognitive processing demand. Event-related potentials were measured at the omission of a syntactically expected object argument in a speech sequence. English monolingual adults listened to pair...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nakano, Hiroko, Rosario, Mari-Anne M., Oshima-Takane, Yuriko, Pierce, Lara, Tate, Sophie G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4166008/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25121623
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/WNR.0000000000000250
_version_ 1782335184998236160
author Nakano, Hiroko
Rosario, Mari-Anne M.
Oshima-Takane, Yuriko
Pierce, Lara
Tate, Sophie G.
author_facet Nakano, Hiroko
Rosario, Mari-Anne M.
Oshima-Takane, Yuriko
Pierce, Lara
Tate, Sophie G.
author_sort Nakano, Hiroko
collection PubMed
description The current study provides evidence that the absence of a syntactically expected item leads to a sustained cognitive processing demand. Event-related potentials were measured at the omission of a syntactically expected object argument in a speech sequence. English monolingual adults listened to paired sentences. The first sentence in the pair established a context. The second sentence provided a response to the first sentence that was either grammatically correct by containing an overt object argument in the form of a pronoun, or was syntactically unacceptable by omitting the expected object pronoun. Event-related potentials measured at the omission of the object argument showed a prolonged positivity for 100–600 ms with a broad scalp distribution, and for 600–1000 ms with a focus in the anterior region. This observed omitted stimulus potential may contain characteristics of the P300 component, associated with the detection of the deviation of an expected stimulus, and the classical P600 related to syntactic reanalysis. Further, the late anterior P600 may indicate an increased memory demand in sentence comprehension. Thus, this linguistic omitted stimulus potential is a cognitive indicator of language processing that can be used to investigate the organization of linguistic knowledge.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4166008
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41660082014-09-19 Electrophysiological response to omitted stimulus in sentence processing Nakano, Hiroko Rosario, Mari-Anne M. Oshima-Takane, Yuriko Pierce, Lara Tate, Sophie G. Neuroreport Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuropsychology The current study provides evidence that the absence of a syntactically expected item leads to a sustained cognitive processing demand. Event-related potentials were measured at the omission of a syntactically expected object argument in a speech sequence. English monolingual adults listened to paired sentences. The first sentence in the pair established a context. The second sentence provided a response to the first sentence that was either grammatically correct by containing an overt object argument in the form of a pronoun, or was syntactically unacceptable by omitting the expected object pronoun. Event-related potentials measured at the omission of the object argument showed a prolonged positivity for 100–600 ms with a broad scalp distribution, and for 600–1000 ms with a focus in the anterior region. This observed omitted stimulus potential may contain characteristics of the P300 component, associated with the detection of the deviation of an expected stimulus, and the classical P600 related to syntactic reanalysis. Further, the late anterior P600 may indicate an increased memory demand in sentence comprehension. Thus, this linguistic omitted stimulus potential is a cognitive indicator of language processing that can be used to investigate the organization of linguistic knowledge. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2014-10-01 2014-08-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4166008/ /pubmed/25121623 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/WNR.0000000000000250 Text en © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivitives 3.0 License, where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0.
spellingShingle Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuropsychology
Nakano, Hiroko
Rosario, Mari-Anne M.
Oshima-Takane, Yuriko
Pierce, Lara
Tate, Sophie G.
Electrophysiological response to omitted stimulus in sentence processing
title Electrophysiological response to omitted stimulus in sentence processing
title_full Electrophysiological response to omitted stimulus in sentence processing
title_fullStr Electrophysiological response to omitted stimulus in sentence processing
title_full_unstemmed Electrophysiological response to omitted stimulus in sentence processing
title_short Electrophysiological response to omitted stimulus in sentence processing
title_sort electrophysiological response to omitted stimulus in sentence processing
topic Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuropsychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4166008/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25121623
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/WNR.0000000000000250
work_keys_str_mv AT nakanohiroko electrophysiologicalresponsetoomittedstimulusinsentenceprocessing
AT rosariomariannem electrophysiologicalresponsetoomittedstimulusinsentenceprocessing
AT oshimatakaneyuriko electrophysiologicalresponsetoomittedstimulusinsentenceprocessing
AT piercelara electrophysiologicalresponsetoomittedstimulusinsentenceprocessing
AT tatesophieg electrophysiologicalresponsetoomittedstimulusinsentenceprocessing