Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
Date
Availability
1-2 of 2
Jan-Mathijs Schoffelen
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Neurobiology of Language (2022) 3 (4): 575–598.
Published: 29 September 2022
FIGURES
| View All (4)
Abstract
View articletitled, Supramodal Sentence Processing in the Human Brain: fMRI Evidence for the Influence of Syntactic Complexity in More Than 200 Participants
View
PDF
for article titled, Supramodal Sentence Processing in the Human Brain: fMRI Evidence for the Influence of Syntactic Complexity in More Than 200 Participants
This study investigated two questions. One is: To what degree is sentence processing beyond single words independent of the input modality (speech vs. reading)? The second question is: Which parts of the network recruited by both modalities is sensitive to syntactic complexity? These questions were investigated by having more than 200 participants read or listen to well-formed sentences or series of unconnected words. A largely left-hemisphere frontotemporoparietal network was found to be supramodal in nature, i.e., independent of input modality. In addition, the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG) and the left posterior middle temporal gyrus (LpMTG) were most clearly associated with left-branching complexity. The left anterior temporal lobe showed the greatest sensitivity to sentences that differed in right-branching complexity. Moreover, activity in LIFG and LpMTG increased from sentence onset to end, in parallel with an increase of the left-branching complexity. While LIFG, bilateral anterior temporal lobe, posterior MTG, and left inferior parietal lobe all contribute to the supramodal unification processes, the results suggest that these regions differ in their respective contributions to syntactic complexity related processing. The consequences of these findings for neurobiological models of language processing are discussed.
Includes: Supplementary data
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Neurobiology of Language (2022) 3 (1): 149–179.
Published: 10 February 2022
FIGURES
| View All (9)
Abstract
View articletitled, Lexical Frequency and Sentence Context Influence the Brain’s Response to Single Words
View
PDF
for article titled, Lexical Frequency and Sentence Context Influence the Brain’s Response to Single Words
Typical adults read remarkably quickly. Such fast reading is facilitated by brain processes that are sensitive to both word frequency and contextual constraints. It is debated as to whether these attributes have additive or interactive effects on language processing in the brain. We investigated this issue by analysing existing magnetoencephalography data from 99 participants reading intact and scrambled sentences . Using a cross-validated model comparison scheme, we found that lexical frequency predicted the word-by-word elicited MEG signal in a widespread cortical network, irrespective of sentential context. In contrast, index (ordinal word position) was more strongly encoded in sentence words, in left front-temporal areas. This confirms that frequency influences word processing independently of predictability, and that contextual constraints affect word-by-word brain responses. With a conservative multiple comparisons correction, only the interaction between lexical frequency and surprisal survived, in anterior temporal and frontal cortex, and not between lexical frequency and entropy, nor between lexical frequency and index. However, interestingly, the uncorrected index × frequency interaction revealed an effect in left frontal and temporal cortex that reversed in time and space for intact compared to scrambled sentences. Finally, we provide evidence to suggest that, in sentences, lexical frequency and predictability may independently influence early (<150 ms) and late stages of word processing, but also interact during late stages of word processing (>150–250 ms), thus helping to converge previous contradictory eye-tracking and electrophysiological literature. Current neurocognitive models of reading would benefit from accounting for these differing effects of lexical frequency and predictability on different stages of word processing.
Includes: Supplementary data