Minding the PS, queues, and PXQs: uniformity of semantic processing across multiple stimulus types.

An assumption in the reading literature is that access to semantics is gated by stimulus properties such as orthographic regularity or familiarity. In the electrophysiological domain, this assumption has led to a debate about the features necessary to initiate semantic processing as indexed by the N400 event-related potential (ERP) component. To examine this, we recorded ERPs to sentences with endings that were familiar and legal (words), familiar and illegal (acronyms), or unfamiliar and illegal (consonant or vowel strings). N400 congruency effects (reduced negativity to expected relative to unexpected endings) were observed for words and acronyms; these were identical in size, timing, and scalp distribution. Notably, clear N400 potentials were also elicited by unfamiliar, illegal strings, suggesting that, at least in a verbal context, semantic access may be attempted for any letter string, regardless of familiarity or regularity.

[1]  M. Kutas,et al.  Event-related brain potentials to semantically inappropriate and surprisingly large words , 1980, Biological Psychology.

[2]  Conrad Perry,et al.  The DRC model of visual word recognition and reading aloud: An extension to German , 2000 .

[3]  P. Holcomb,et al.  Event-related potential indices of masked repetition priming. , 2003, Psychophysiology.

[4]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 2. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model. , 1982, Psychological review.

[5]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. , 1981 .

[6]  T. Allison,et al.  Word recognition in the human inferior temporal lobe , 1994, Nature.

[7]  L. Katz,et al.  Functional neuroimaging studies of reading and reading disability (developmental dyslexia). , 2000, Mental retardation and developmental disabilities research reviews.

[8]  E. Olivares,et al.  An ERP Study of Expectancy Violation in Face Perception , 1994, Brain and Cognition.

[9]  Peter Hagoort,et al.  The Processing Nature of the N400: Evidence from Masked Priming , 1993, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[10]  Kara D. Federmeier,et al.  Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[11]  M. Kutas,et al.  Neurophysiological evidence for visual perceptual categorization of words and faces within 150 ms. , 1998, Psychophysiology.

[12]  Fabien Perrin,et al.  Semantic analysis of auditory input during sleep: studies with event related potentials. , 2002, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[13]  M. Kutas,et al.  Interactions between sentence context and word frequencyinevent-related brainpotentials , 1990, Memory & cognition.

[14]  Riitta Salmelin,et al.  Cortical Effects of Shifting Letter Position in Letter Strings of Varying Length , 2003 .

[15]  M. Kutas,et al.  The Search for Common Sense: An Electrophysiological Study of the Comprehension of Words and Pictures in Reading , 1996, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[16]  Valerie A. Carr,et al.  Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Modality-Specific and Supramodal Word Processing , 2003, Neuron.

[17]  D. Deacon,et al.  Event-related potential indices of semantic priming using masked and unmasked words: evidence that the N400 does not reflect a post-lexical process. , 2000, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[18]  C Van Petten,et al.  Word repetition in amnesia. Electrophysiological measures of impaired and spared memory. , 2000, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[19]  J. Dejerine Sur un cas de cécité verbale avec agraphie suivi d’autopsie , 1891 .

[20]  C. Petten,et al.  Conceptual relationships between spoken words and environmental sounds: Event-related brain potential measures , 1995, Neuropsychologia.

[21]  J. Grainger,et al.  An Electrophysiological Study of the Effects of Orthographic Neighborhood Size on Printed Word Perception , 2002, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[22]  M. Rugg,et al.  Lexical contribution to nonword-repetition effects: Evidence from event-related potentials , 1987, Memory & cognition.

[23]  S. Kelly,et al.  Neural correlates of bimodal speech and gesture comprehension , 2004, Brain and Language.

[24]  Kara D. Federmeier,et al.  Better the DVL You Know , 2007, Psychological science.

[25]  T. Allison,et al.  Differential Sensitivity of Human Visual Cortex to Faces, Letterstrings, and Textures: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study , 1996, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[26]  R. Salmelin,et al.  Dynamics of visual feature analysis and object-level processing in face versus letter-string perception. , 2002, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[27]  M Coltheart,et al.  DRC: a dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. , 2001, Psychological review.

[28]  H. Neville,et al.  Language and , 2019, Adventure Diffusion.

[29]  M. Kutas,et al.  Event-related brain potentials to grammatical errors and semantic anomalies , 1983, Memory & cognition.

[30]  Walter Ritter,et al.  Repetition and semantic priming of nonwords: implications for theories of N400 and word recognition. , 2004, Psychophysiology.

[31]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Computing the meanings of words in reading: cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. , 2004, Psychological review.

[32]  D. Stuss,et al.  Electrophysiological manifestations of typicality judgment , 1988, Brain and Language.

[33]  M. Kutas,et al.  Fractionating the Word Repetition Effect with Event-Related Potentials , 1991, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[34]  Kara D. Federmeier,et al.  The acronym superiority effect , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.