Influence of phonological expectations during a phoneme deletion task: evidence from event-related brain potentials.

Several studies have identified a negativity [the phonological mismatch negativity (PMN)] preceding the N400 during auditory sentence comprehension. The present study investigated whether the PMN reflects a prelexical or lexical stage of spoken word recognition. Event-related brain potentials (ERPs) were recorded to investigate phonological processing independently from lexical/semantic influences during a task requiring metalinguistic analysis of speech stimuli. Participants were instructed to omit the initial phoneme from a word ("clap" without the/k/) after which they heard a correct (lap) or incorrect (cap, ap, nose) answer. The PMN (peaking at 270 ms) was largest to incorrect items and did not differentiate between items that shared the same rime and items that were phonologically unrelated to the correct choice. Further, the PMN did not differ between word (cap) and nonword (ap) choices. The P300 was largest to correct items but was also seen to choices that rhymed with the correct answer. It is concluded that the PMN serves as a neural marker for the analysis of acoustic input merging with prelexical phonemic expectations.

[1]  S. Geisser,et al.  On methods in the analysis of profile data , 1959 .

[2]  Colin M. Brown,et al.  Electrophysiological Evidence for Early Contextual Influences during Spoken-Word Recognition: N200 Versus N400 Effects , 2001, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[3]  H. Jasper,et al.  The ten-twenty electrode system of the International Federation. The International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. , 1999, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology. Supplement.

[4]  J. Connolly,et al.  Event-Related Potential Components Reflect Phonological and Semantic Processing of the Terminal Word of Spoken Sentences , 1994, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[5]  J. Connolly,et al.  The effects of processing requirements on neurophysiological responses to spoken sentences , 1990, Brain and Language.

[6]  J. Connolly,et al.  Assessing adult receptive vocabulary with event-related potentials: an investigation of cross-modal and cross-form priming. , 1995, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[7]  D Norris,et al.  Merging information in speech recognition: Feedback is never necessary , 2000, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[8]  K Alho,et al.  Phonological aspects of word recognition as revealed by high-resolution spatio-temporal brain mapping , 2001, Neuroreport.

[9]  L L Elliott,et al.  Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. , 1977, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  Jerome Rosner,et al.  The Auditory Analysis Test , 1971 .

[11]  C. C. Wood,et al.  Scalp distributions of event-related potentials: an ambiguity associated with analysis of variance models. , 1985, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[12]  J. Connolly,et al.  Event-related potential sensitivity to acoustic and semantic properties of terminal words in sentences , 1992, Brain and Language.

[13]  J. Polich,et al.  Cognitive and biological determinants of P300: an integrative review , 1995, Biological Psychology.

[14]  D. Norris.  Shortlist: a connectionist model of continuous speech recognition , 1994, Cognition.

[15]  Ray Johnson.  For Distinguished Early Career Contribution to Psychophysiology: Award Address, 1985 , 1986 .

[16]  W. Marslen-Wilson.  Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition , 1987, Cognition.

[17]  Colin M. Brown,et al.  ERP effects of listening to speech: semantic ERP effects , 2000, Neuropsychologia.

[18]  Evaluation of The Speech Perception in Noise (Spin) Test , 1979, Otolaryngology and head and neck surgery.

[19]  E. Plante,et al.  Time course of word identification and semantic integration in spoken language. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.