The Truth Before and After: Brain Potentials Reveal Automatic Activation of Event Knowledge during Sentence Comprehension

How does knowledge of real-world events shape our understanding of incoming language? Do temporal terms like “before” and “after” impact the online recruitment of real-world event knowledge? These questions were addressed in two ERP experiments, wherein participants read sentences that started with “before” or “after” and contained a critical word that rendered each sentence true or false (e.g., “Before/After the global economic crisis, securing a mortgage was easy/harder”). The critical words were matched on predictability, rated truth value, and semantic relatedness to the words in the sentence. Regardless of whether participants explicitly verified the sentences or not, false-after-sentences elicited larger N400s than true-after-sentences, consistent with the well-established finding that semantic retrieval of concepts is facilitated when they are consistent with real-world knowledge. However, although the truth judgments did not differ between before- and after-sentences, no such sentence N400 truth value effect occurred in before-sentences, whereas false-before-sentences elicited an enhanced subsequent positive ERPs. The temporal term “before” itself elicited more negative ERPs at central electrode channels than “after.” These patterns of results show that, irrespective of ultimate sentence truth value judgments, semantic retrieval of concepts is momentarily facilitated when they are consistent with the known event outcome compared to when they are not. However, this inappropriate facilitation incurs later processing costs as reflected in the subsequent positive ERP deflections. The results suggest that automatic activation of event knowledge can impede the incremental semantic processes required to establish sentence truth value.

[1]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Event structure in perception and conception. , 2001, Psychological bulletin.

[2]  Heather J. Ferguson,et al.  Eye movements reveal rapid concurrent access to factual and counterfactual interpretations of the world , 2012, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[3]  Pamela Coker Syntactic and semantic factors in the acquisition of before and after , 1978, Journal of Child Language.

[4]  J. Mandler On the comprehension of temporal order , 1986 .

[5]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  If the real world were irrelevant, so to speak: The role of propositional truth-value in counterfactual sentence comprehension , 2012, Cognition.

[6]  Marta Kutas,et al.  Quantifiers more or less quantify online: ERP evidence for partial incremental interpretation. , 2010, Journal of memory and language.

[7]  Salim Roukos,et al.  Brain potentials related to stages of sentence verification. , 1983, Psychophysiology.

[8]  P. Gordon,et al.  The interplay of discourse congruence and lexical association during sentence processing: Evidence from ERPs and eye tracking. , 2007, Journal of memory and language.

[9]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Predicting form and meaning: Evidence from brain potentials , 2016 .

[10]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  “Who’s he?” Event-related brain potentials and unbound pronouns , 2014 .

[11]  David I. Beaver,et al.  A Uniform Analysis of 'Before' and 'After' , 2003 .

[12]  Gerry T. M. Altmann,et al.  Anticipating the garden path: The horse raced past the barn ate the cake , 2013 .

[13]  B. Mohammadi,et al.  Impaired comprehension of temporal connectives in Parkinson’s disease—A neuroimaging study , 2012, Neuropsychologia.

[14]  Sabine Guéraud,et al.  What Have We Been Missing? The Role of General World Knowledge in Discourse Processing , 2005 .

[15]  Marta Kutas,et al.  Verb aspect and the activation of event knowledge. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[16]  Edward J. O'Brien,et al.  Knowledge Activation, Integration, and Validation During Narrative Text Comprehension , 2014 .

[17]  A. Reboul,et al.  The logical status of fictional discourse: what Searle’s speaker can’t say to his hearer , 1990 .

[18]  Peter Aldhous,et al.  Before and after , 2002, Nature.

[19]  Nicholas C. Hindy,et al.  A cortical network for the encoding of object change. , 2015, Cerebral cortex.

[20]  M. Kutas,et al.  Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. , 1980, Science.

[21]  Van Berkum,et al.  The neuropragmatics of 'simple' utterance comprehension: An ERP review , 2009 .

[22]  Ken McRae,et al.  People Use their Knowledge of Common Events to Understand Language, and Do So as Quickly as Possible , 2009, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[23]  Marta Kutas,et al.  When temporal terms belie conceptual order , 1998, Nature.

[24]  E. Moreno,et al.  Tell me sweet little lies: An event-related potentials study on the processing of social lies , 2016, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[25]  J. Kounios,et al.  Structure and process in semantic memory: evidence from event-related brain potentials and reaction times. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[26]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Quantification, Prediction, and the Online Impact of Sentence Truth-Value: Evidence From Event-Related Potentials , 2015, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[27]  Dorothee J. Chwilla,et al.  When Heuristics Clash with Parsing Routines: ERP Evidence for Conflict Monitoring in Sentence Perception , 2006, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[28]  Marta Kutas,et al.  Rearranging the world: Neural network supporting the processing of temporal connectives , 2012, NeuroImage.

[29]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  Discourse comprehension. , 1997, Annual review of psychology.

[30]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  Time in narrative comprehension , 2001 .

[31]  Herbert H. Clark,et al.  On the process of comparing sentences against pictures , 1972 .

[32]  Sharon L. Thompson-Schill,et al.  The Effect of Object State-Changes on Event Processing: Do Objects Compete with Themselves? , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[33]  Kara D. Federmeier,et al.  Thirty years and counting: finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). , 2011, Annual review of psychology.

[34]  M. Just,et al.  From the SelectedWorks of Marcel Adam Just 1992 A capacity theory of comprehension : Individual differences in working memory , 2017 .

[35]  D. Rapp How do readers handle incorrect information during reading? , 2008, Memory & cognition.

[36]  Hartmut Fitz,et al.  Getting real about Semantic Illusions: Rethinking the functional role of the P600 in language comprehension , 2012, Brain Research.

[37]  Time is of the Essence: Processing Temporal Connectives During Reading , 2005 .

[38]  Tobias Richter,et al.  Does Validation During Language Comprehension Depend on an Evaluative Mindset? , 2014 .

[39]  Alex Lascarides,et al.  Temporal Connectives in a Discourse Context , 1993, EACL.

[40]  David R. Dowty The effects of aspectual class on the temporal structure of discourse: semantics or pragmatics? , 1986, The Language of Time - A Reader.

[41]  M. Kutas,et al.  Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association , 1984, Nature.

[42]  M. Kutas,et al.  Who Did What and When? Using Word- and Clause-Level ERPs to Monitor Working Memory Usage in Reading , 1995, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[43]  A. Trosborg,et al.  Children's comprehension of ‘before’ and ‘after’ reinvestigated , 1982, Journal of Child Language.

[44]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  Situation models in language comprehension and memory. , 1998, Psychological bulletin.

[45]  W. Kintsch The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension : a construction-integration model , 1991 .

[46]  Kenneth Hugdahl,et al.  A Standard Computerized Version of the Reading Span Test in Different Languages , 2008 .

[47]  Stephanie Kelter,et al.  Comprehending narratives containing flashbacks: evidence for temporally organized representations. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[48]  Jason Bohan,et al.  Anomalies at the Borderline of Awareness: An ERP Study , 2011, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[49]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Individual differences and contextual bias in pronoun resolution: Evidence from ERPs , 2006, Brain Research.

[50]  Richard J. Gerrig,et al.  The Scope of Memory-Based Processing , 2005 .

[51]  E. Clark On the acquisition of the meaning of before and after , 1971 .

[52]  David J. Therriault,et al.  Processing and Representing Temporal Information in Narrative Text , 2007 .

[53]  Peter Hagoort,et al.  Beyond the sentence given , 2007, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[54]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Pragmatic skills predict online counterfactual comprehension: Evidence from the N400 , 2016, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[55]  Ronghua Wang,et al.  Language and Time: A Cognitive Linguistics Approach* , 2015 .

[56]  J. Elman,et al.  Generalized event knowledge activation during online sentence comprehension. , 2012, Journal of memory and language.

[57]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Testing the limits of the semantic illusion phenomenon: ERPs reveal temporary semantic change deafness in discourse comprehension. , 2005, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[58]  Todd R. Ferretti,et al.  Grammatical aspect, lexical aspect, and event duration constrain the availability of events in narratives , 2013, Cognition.

[59]  G. Altmann,et al.  Knowing what, where, and when: Event comprehension in language processing , 2014, Cognition.

[60]  Giosuè Baggio,et al.  Computing and recomputing discourse models : An ERP study , 2008 .

[61]  L. Aravind,et al.  Integration of Word Meaning and World Knowledge in Language Comprehension , 2022 .

[62]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  “If a lion could speak …”: Online sensitivity to propositional truth-value of unrealistic counterfactual sentences , 2013 .

[63]  J. Elman,et al.  Effects of event knowledge in processing verbal arguments. , 2010, Journal of memory and language.

[64]  C. Van Petten,et al.  Prediction during language comprehension: benefits, costs, and ERP components. , 2012, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[65]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  When the Truth Is Not Too Hard to Handle , 2008, Psychological science.

[66]  Murray Singer,et al.  Validation in Reading Comprehension , 2013 .

[67]  Mike Rinck,et al.  Processing of temporal information: Evidence from eye movements , 2003, Memory & cognition.

[68]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Testing the limits of the semantic illusion phenomenon: ERPs reveal temporary change deafness in discourse comprehension , 2004 .

[69]  Giosuè Baggio,et al.  Language, linguistics and cognition , 2012 .

[70]  A. Hähnel,et al.  Using temporal information to construct, update, and retrieve situation models of narratives. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[71]  Evelyn C. Ferstl,et al.  Emotional and Temporal Aspects of Situation Model Processing during Text Comprehension: An Event-Related fMRI Study , 2005, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[72]  Giosuè Baggio,et al.  Logic as Marr's Computational Level: Four Case Studies , 2015, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[73]  Jelena Mirkovic,et al.  Incrementality and Prediction in Human Sentence Processing , 2009, Cogn. Sci..