Cargando…

Are form priming effects phonological or perceptual? Electrophysiological evidence from American Sign Language

Form priming has been used to identify and demarcate the processes that underlie word and sign recognition. The facilitation that results from the prime and target being related in form is typically interpreted in terms of pre-activation of linguistic representations, with little to no consideration...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Meade, Gabriela, Lee, Brittany, Massa, Natasja, Holcomb, Phillip J., Midgley, Katherine J., Emmorey, Karen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9578293/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34906848
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104979
_version_ 1784811941549572096
author Meade, Gabriela
Lee, Brittany
Massa, Natasja
Holcomb, Phillip J.
Midgley, Katherine J.
Emmorey, Karen
author_facet Meade, Gabriela
Lee, Brittany
Massa, Natasja
Holcomb, Phillip J.
Midgley, Katherine J.
Emmorey, Karen
author_sort Meade, Gabriela
collection PubMed
description Form priming has been used to identify and demarcate the processes that underlie word and sign recognition. The facilitation that results from the prime and target being related in form is typically interpreted in terms of pre-activation of linguistic representations, with little to no consideration for the potential contributions of increased perceptual overlap between related pairs. Indeed, isolating the contribution of perceptual similarity is impossible in spoken languages; there are no listeners who can perceive speech but have not acquired a sound-based phonological system. Here, we compared the electrophysiological indices of form priming effects in American Sign Language between hearing non-signers (i.e., who had no visual-manual phonological system) and deaf signers. We reasoned that similarities in priming effects between groups would most likely be perceptual in nature, whereas priming effects that are specific to the signer group would reflect pre-activation of phonological representations. Behavior in the go/no-go repetition detection task was remarkably similar between groups. Priming in a pre-N400 window was also largely similar across groups, consistent with an early effect of perceptual similarity. However, priming effects diverged between groups during the subsequent N400 and post-N400 windows. Signers had more typical form priming effects and were especially attuned to handshape overlap, whereas non-signers did not exhibit an N400 component and were more sensitive to location overlap. We attribute this pattern to an interplay between perceptual similarity and phonological knowledge. Perceptual similarity contributes to early phonological priming effects, while phonological knowledge tunes sensitivity to linguistically relevant dimensions of perceptual similarity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9578293
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95782932022-10-18 Are form priming effects phonological or perceptual? Electrophysiological evidence from American Sign Language Meade, Gabriela Lee, Brittany Massa, Natasja Holcomb, Phillip J. Midgley, Katherine J. Emmorey, Karen Cognition Article Form priming has been used to identify and demarcate the processes that underlie word and sign recognition. The facilitation that results from the prime and target being related in form is typically interpreted in terms of pre-activation of linguistic representations, with little to no consideration for the potential contributions of increased perceptual overlap between related pairs. Indeed, isolating the contribution of perceptual similarity is impossible in spoken languages; there are no listeners who can perceive speech but have not acquired a sound-based phonological system. Here, we compared the electrophysiological indices of form priming effects in American Sign Language between hearing non-signers (i.e., who had no visual-manual phonological system) and deaf signers. We reasoned that similarities in priming effects between groups would most likely be perceptual in nature, whereas priming effects that are specific to the signer group would reflect pre-activation of phonological representations. Behavior in the go/no-go repetition detection task was remarkably similar between groups. Priming in a pre-N400 window was also largely similar across groups, consistent with an early effect of perceptual similarity. However, priming effects diverged between groups during the subsequent N400 and post-N400 windows. Signers had more typical form priming effects and were especially attuned to handshape overlap, whereas non-signers did not exhibit an N400 component and were more sensitive to location overlap. We attribute this pattern to an interplay between perceptual similarity and phonological knowledge. Perceptual similarity contributes to early phonological priming effects, while phonological knowledge tunes sensitivity to linguistically relevant dimensions of perceptual similarity. 2022-03 2021-12-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9578293/ /pubmed/34906848 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104979 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ).
spellingShingle Article
Meade, Gabriela
Lee, Brittany
Massa, Natasja
Holcomb, Phillip J.
Midgley, Katherine J.
Emmorey, Karen
Are form priming effects phonological or perceptual? Electrophysiological evidence from American Sign Language
title Are form priming effects phonological or perceptual? Electrophysiological evidence from American Sign Language
title_full Are form priming effects phonological or perceptual? Electrophysiological evidence from American Sign Language
title_fullStr Are form priming effects phonological or perceptual? Electrophysiological evidence from American Sign Language
title_full_unstemmed Are form priming effects phonological or perceptual? Electrophysiological evidence from American Sign Language
title_short Are form priming effects phonological or perceptual? Electrophysiological evidence from American Sign Language
title_sort are form priming effects phonological or perceptual? electrophysiological evidence from american sign language
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9578293/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34906848
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104979
work_keys_str_mv AT meadegabriela areformprimingeffectsphonologicalorperceptualelectrophysiologicalevidencefromamericansignlanguage
AT leebrittany areformprimingeffectsphonologicalorperceptualelectrophysiologicalevidencefromamericansignlanguage
AT massanatasja areformprimingeffectsphonologicalorperceptualelectrophysiologicalevidencefromamericansignlanguage
AT holcombphillipj areformprimingeffectsphonologicalorperceptualelectrophysiologicalevidencefromamericansignlanguage
AT midgleykatherinej areformprimingeffectsphonologicalorperceptualelectrophysiologicalevidencefromamericansignlanguage
AT emmoreykaren areformprimingeffectsphonologicalorperceptualelectrophysiologicalevidencefromamericansignlanguage