Presentations

Abstract

Prominent theories of predictive language processing assume that language production processes are used to anticipate upcoming linguistic input during comprehension (Dell & Chang, 2014; Pickering & Garrod, 2013). Here, we explored the converse case: Does a task set including production in addition to comprehension encourage prediction, compared to a task only including comprehension? To test this hypothesis, participants carried out a cross-modal naming task (Exp 1a), a self-paced reading task (Exp1 b) that did not include overt production, and a task (Exp 1c) in which naming and reading trials were evenly interleaved. We used the same predictable (N = 40) and non-predictable (N = 40) sentences in all three tasks. The sentences consisted of a fixed agent, a transitive verb and a predictable or non-predictable target word (The man breaks a glass vs. The man borrows a glass). The mean cloze probability in the predictable sentences was .39 (ranging from .06 to .8; zero in the non-predictable sentences). A total of 162 volunteers took part in the experiment which was run in a between-participants design. In Exp 1a, fifty-four participants listened to recordings of the sentences which ended right before the spoken target word. Coinciding with the end of the playback, a picture of the target word was shown which the participants were asked to name as fast as possible. Analyses of their naming latencies revealed a statistically significant naming advantage of 108 ms on predictable over non-predictable trials. Moreover, we found that the objects’ naming advantage was predicted by the target words’ cloze probability in the sentences (r = .347, p = .038). In Exp 1b, 54 participants were asked to read the same sentences in a self-paced fashion. To allow for testing of potential spillover effects, we added a neutral prepositional phrase (breaks a glass from the collection/borrows a glass from the neighbor) to each sentence. The sentences were read word-by-word, advancing by pushing the space bar. On 30% of the trials, comprehension questions were used to keep up participants' focus on comprehending the sentences. Analyses of their spillover region reading times revealed a numerical advantage (8 ms; tspillover = -1.1, n.s.) in the predictable as compared to the non-predictable condition. Importantly, the analysis of participants' responses to the comprehension questions, showed that they understood the sentences (mean accuracy = 93%). In Exp 1c, the task comprised 50% naming trials and 50% reading trials which appeared in random order. Fifty-four participants named and read the same objects and sentences as in the previous versions. The results showed a naming advantage on predictable over non-predictable items (99 ms) and a positive correlation between the items’ cloze probability and their naming advantage (r = .322, p = .055). Crucially, the post-target reading time analysis showed that with naming trials and reading trials interleaved, there was also a statistically reliable prediction effect on reading trials. Participants were 19 ms faster at reading the spillover region on predictable relative to non-predictable items (tspillover = -2.624). To summarize, although we used the same sentences in all sub-experiments, we observed effects of prediction only when the task set involved production. In the reading only experiment (Exp 1b), no evidence for anticipation was obtained although participants clearly understood the sentences and the same sentences yielded reading facilitation when interleaved with naming trials (Exp 1c). This suggests that predictive language processing can be modulated by the comprehenders’ task set. When the task set involves language production, as is often the case in natural conversation, comprehenders appear to engage in prediction to a stronger degree than in pure comprehension tasks. In our discussion, we will discuss the notion that language production may engage prediction, because being able to predict words another person is about to say might optimize the comprehension process and enable smooth turn-taking.

Abstract

A substantial body of literature has shown that readers and listeners often anticipate information. An open question concerns the mechanisms underlying predictive language processing. Multiple mechanisms have been suggested. One proposal is that comprehenders use event knowledge to predict upcoming words. Other theoretical frameworks propose that predictions are made based on simple word associations. In a recent EEG study, Metusalem and colleagues reported evidence for the modulating influence of event knowledge on prediction. They examined the degree to which event knowledge is activated during sentence comprehension. Their participants read two sentences, establishing an event scenario, which were followed by a final sentence containing one of three target words: a highly expected word, a semantically unexpected word that was related to the described event, or a semantically unexpected and event-unrelated word (see Figure, for an example). Analyses of participants’ ERPs elicited by the target words revealed a three-way split with regard to the amplitude of the N400 elicited by the different types of target: the expected targets elicited the smallest N400, the unexpected and event-unrelated targets elicited the largest N400. Importantly, the amplitude of the N400 elicited by the unexpected but event-related targets was significantly attenuated relative to the amplitude of the N400 elicited by the unexpected and event-unrelated targets. Metusalem et al. concluded that event knowledge is immediately available to constrain on-line language processing. Based on a post-hoc analysis, the authors rejected the possibility that the results could be explained by simple word associations. In the present study, we addressed the role of simple word associations in discourse comprehension more directly. Specifically, we explored the contribution of associative priming to the graded N400 pattern seen in Metusalem et al’s study. We conducted two EEG experiments. In Experiment 1, we reran Metusalem and colleagues’ context manipulation and closely replicated their results. In Experiment 2, we selected two words from the event-establishing sentences which were most strongly associated with the unexpected but event-related targets in the final sentences. Each of the two associates was then placed in a neutral carrier sentence. We controlled that none of the other words in these carrier sentences was associatively related to the target words. Importantly, the two carrier sentences did not build up a coherent event. We recorded EEG while participants read the carrier sentences followed by the same final sentences as in Experiment 1. The results showed that as in Experiment 1 the amplitude of the N400 elicited by both types of unexpected target words was larger than the N400 elicited by the highly expected target. Moreover, we found a global tendency towards the critical difference between event-related and event-unrelated unexpected targets which reached statistical significance only at parietal electrodes over the right hemisphere. Because the difference between event-related and event-unrelated conditions was larger when the sentences formed a coherent event compared to when they did not, our results suggest that associative priming alone cannot account for the N400 pattern observed in our Experiment 1 (and in the study by Metusalem et al.). However, because part of the effect remained, probably due to associative facilitation, the findings demonstrate that during discourse reading both event knowledge activation and simple word associations jointly contribute to the prediction process. The results highlight that multiple mechanisms underlie predictive language processing.

Abstract

Janssen and Barber (2012) reported two studies on the production of complex noun phrases (Spanish and French noun-adjective and noun-noun phrases). They found that production latencies depended only on the frequencies of the phrases, but not on the frequencies of the individual words. This pattern may be seen as evidence for lexical storage of phrases and against the traditional “words & rules” view of the representation of linguistic knowledge. We will discuss a series of experiments on the production of Dutch adjective-noun phrases. We replicated the phrase frequency effect seen by Janssen and Barber, but also found a robust effect of the frequency of the first word of the phrase. We argue that the phrase frequency effect arises during the conceptual preparation of the utterance and that the results are consistent with the view that phrases are composed by combining individual words, in line with the “words & rules” view.

Abstract

Frequent and predictable words are generally pronounced with less effort and are therefore acoustically more reduced than less frequent or unpredictable words. Local predictability can be operationalised by Transitional Probability (TP), which indicates how likely a word is to occur given its immediate context. We investigated whether and how probabilistic reduction effects on word durations change with adult age when reading aloud content words embedded in sentences.
The results showed equally large frequency effects on verb and noun durations for both younger (Mage = 20 years) and older (Mage = 68 years) adults. Backward TP also affected word duration for younger and older adults alike. ForwardTP, however, had no significant effect on word duration in either age group.
Our results resemble earlier findings of more robust BackwardTP effects compared to ForwardTP effects. Furthermore, unlike often reported decline in predictive processing with aging, probabilistic reduction effects remain stable across adulthood.

Abstract

A recurring criticism in the field of psycholinguistics and is the lack of ecological validity of experimental designs. For example, many experiments on sentence comprehension are conducted enclosed booths, where sentences are presented word by word on a computer screen. In addition, very often participants are instructed to make judgments that relate directly to the experimental manipulation. Thus, the contexts in which these processes are studied is quite restricted, which calls into question the generalizability of the results to more naturalistic environments. A possible solution to this problem is the use of virtual reality (VR) in psycholinguistic experiments. By immersing participants into a virtual environment, ecological validity can be increased while experimental control is maintained.
In the current experiment we combine electroencephalography (EEG) and VR to look at semantic processing in a more naturalistic setting. During the experiment, participants move through a visually rich virtual restaurant. Tables and avatars are placed in the restaurant and participants are instructed to stop at each table and look at the object (e.g. a plate with a steak) in front of the avatar. Then, the avatar will produce an utterance to accompany the object (e.g. “I think this steak is very nice”), in which the noun will either match (e.g. steak) or mismatch (e.g. mandarin) with the item on the table. Based on previous research, we predict a modulation of the N400, which should be larger in the mismatch than the match condition. Implications of the use of virtual reality for experimental research will be discussed.

Abstract

Fluctuations in pupil size have been shown to reflect variations in processing demands during language
comprehension. Increases in pupil diameter have been observed as a consequence of syntactic anomalies
(Schluroff 1982), increased syntactic complexity (Just & Carpenter 1993) and lexical ambiguity (Ben-
Nun 1986). An issue that has not received attention is whether pupil size also varies due to pragmatic
manipulations. In a pupillometry experiment, we investigated whether pupil diameter is sensitive to
increased processing demands as a result of comprehending an indirect request versus a statement. During
natural conversation, communication is often indirect. For example, in an appropriate context, ''It'' cold in
here'' is a request to shut the window, rather than a statement about room temperature (Holtgraves 1994).
We tested 49 Dutch participants (mean age = 20.8). They were presented with 120 picture-sentence
combinations that could either be interpreted as an indirect request (a picture of a window with the
sentence ''it's hot here'') or as a statement (a picture of a window with the sentence ''it's nice here''). The
indirect requests were non-conventional, i.e. they did not contain directive propositional content and were
not directly related to the underlying felicity conditions (Holtgraves 2002). In order to verify that the
indirect requests were recognized, participants were asked to decide after each combination whether or
not they heard a request. Based on the hypothesis that understanding this type of indirect utterances
requires additional inferences to be made on the part of the listener (e.g., Holtgraves 2002; Searle 1975;
Van Ackeren et al. 2012), we predicted a larger pupil diameter for indirect requests than statements. The
data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models in R, which allow for simultaneous inclusion of
participants and items as random factors (Baayen, Davidson, & Bates 2008). The results revealed a larger
mean pupil size and a larger peak pupil size for indirect requests as compared to statements. In line with
previous studies on pupil size and language comprehension (e.g., Just & Carpenter 1993), this difference
was observed within a 1.5 second window after critical word onset. We suggest that the increase in pupil
size reflects additional on-line processing demands for the comprehension of non-conventional indirect
requests as compared to statements. This supports the idea that comprehending this type of indirect
request requires capacity demanding inferencing on the part of the listener. In addition, this study
demonstrates the usefulness of pupillometry as a tool for experimental research in pragmatics.

Abstract

Fluctuations in pupil size have been shown to reflect variations in processing demands during language
comprehension. Increases in pupil diameter have been observed as a consequence of syntactic anomalies
(Schluroff 1982), increased syntactic complexity (Just & Carpenter 1993) and lexical ambiguity (Ben-
Nun 1986). An issue that has not received attention is whether pupil size also varies due to pragmatic
manipulations. In a pupillometry experiment, we investigated whether pupil diameter is sensitive to
increased processing demands as a result of comprehending an indirect request versus a statement. During
natural conversation, communication is often indirect. For example, in an appropriate context, ''It'' cold in
here'' is a request to shut the window, rather than a statement about room temperature (Holtgraves 1994).
We tested 49 Dutch participants (mean age = 20.8). They were presented with 120 picture-sentence
combinations that could either be interpreted as an indirect request (a picture of a window with the
sentence ''it's hot here'') or as a statement (a picture of a window with the sentence ''it's nice here''). The
indirect requests were non-conventional, i.e. they did not contain directive propositional content and were
not directly related to the underlying felicity conditions (Holtgraves 2002). In order to verify that the
indirect requests were recognized, participants were asked to decide after each combination whether or
not they heard a request. Based on the hypothesis that understanding this type of indirect utterances
requires additional inferences to be made on the part of the listener (e.g., Holtgraves 2002; Searle 1975;
Van Ackeren et al. 2012), we predicted a larger pupil diameter for indirect requests than statements. The
data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models in R, which allow for simultaneous inclusion of
participants and items as random factors (Baayen, Davidson, & Bates 2008). The results revealed a larger
mean pupil size and a larger peak pupil size for indirect requests as compared to statements. In line with
previous studies on pupil size and language comprehension (e.g., Just & Carpenter 1993), this difference
was observed within a 1.5 second window after critical word onset. We suggest that the increase in pupil
size reflects additional on-line processing demands for the comprehension of non-conventional indirect
requests as compared to statements. This supports the idea that comprehending this type of indirect
request requires capacity demanding inferencing on the part of the listener. In addition, this study
demonstrates the usefulness of pupillometry as a tool for experimental research in pragmatics.

Abstract

Subject-verb agreement is one of the most common
grammatical encoding operations in language
production. In many languages, morphological
inflection on verbs code for the number of the head
noun of a subject phrase (e.g., The key to the cabinets
is rusty). Despite the relative ease with which subjectverb
agreement is accomplished, people sometimes
make agreement errors (e.g., The key to the cabinets
are rusty). Such errors offer a window into the early
stages of production planning. Agreement errors are
influenced by both syntactic and semantic factors, and
are more likely to occur when a sentence contains either
conceptual or syntactic number mismatches. Little
is known about the timecourse of these influences,
however, and some controversy exists as to whether
they are independent. The current study was designed
to address these two issues using EEG. Semantic and
syntactic factors influencing number mismatch were
factorially-manipulated in a forced-choice sentence
completion paradigm. To avoid EEG artifact associated
with speaking, participants (N=20) were presented with
a noun-phrase, and pressed a button to indicate which
version of the verb ‘to be’ (is/are) should continue
the sentence. Semantic number was manipulated
using preambles that were semantically-integrated or
unintegrated. Semantic integration refers to the semantic
relationship between nouns in a noun-phrase, with
integrated items promoting conceptual-singularity.
The syntactic manipulation was the number (singular/
plural) of the local noun preceding the decision. This
led to preambles such as “The pizza with the yummy
topping(s)... “ (integated) vs. “The pizza with the tasty
bevarage(s)...” (unintegrated). Behavioral results showed
effects of both Local Noun Number and Semantic
Integration, with more errors and longer reaction times
occurring in the mismatching conditions (i.e., plural
local nouns; unintegrated subject phrases). Classic ERP
analyses locked to the local noun (0-700 ms) and to the
time preceding the response (-600 to 0 ms) showed no
systematic differences between conditions. Despite this
result, we assessed whether difference might emerge
using multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA). Using the
same epochs as above, support-vector machines with a
radial basis function were trained on the single-trial level
to classify the difference between Local Noun Number
and Semantic Integration conditions across time and
channels. Results revealed that both conditions could
be reliably classified at the single subject level, and
that classification accuracy was strongest in the epoch
preceding the response. Classification accuracy was
at chance when a classifier trained to dissociate Local
Noun Number was used to predict Semantic Integration
(and vice versa), providing some evidence of the
independence of the two effects. Significant inter-subject
variability was present in the channels and time-points
that were critical for classification, but earlier timepoints
were more often important for classifying Local Noun
Number than Semantic Integration. One result of this
variability is classification performed across subjects was
at chance, which may explain the failure to find standard
ERP effects. This study thus provides an important first
test of semantic and syntactic influences on subject-verb
agreement with EEG, and demonstrates that where
classic ERP analyses fail, MVPA can reliably distinguish
differences at the neurophysiological level.

Abstract

Prominent theories of predictive language processing assume that language production processes are used to anticipate upcoming linguistic input during comprehension (Dell & Chang, 2014; Pickering & Garrod, 2013). Here, we explore the converse case: Does a task set including production in addition to comprehension encourage prediction, compared to a task only including comprehension? To test this hypothesis, we conducted a cross-modal naming experiment (Experiment 1) including an object naming task and a self-paced reading experiment (Experiment 2) that did not include overt production. We used the same predictable (N = 40) and non-predictable (N = 40) sentences in both experiments. The sentences consisted of a fixed agent, a transitive verb and a predictable or non-predictable target word (The man drinks a beer vs. The man buys a beer). Most of the empirical work on prediction used sentences in which the target words were highly predictable (often with a mean cloze probability > .8) and thus it is little surprising that participants engaged in predictive language processing very easily. In the current sentences, the mean cloze probability in the predictable sentences was .39 (ranging from .06 to .8; zero in the non-predictable sentences). If comprehenders are more likely to engage in predictive processing when the task set involves production, we should observe more pronounced effects of prediction in Experiment 1 as compared to Experiment 2. If production does not enhance prediction, we should observe similar effects of prediction in both experiments. In Experiment 1, participants (N = 54) listened to recordings of the sentences which ended right before the spoken target word. Coinciding with the end of the playback, a picture of the target word was shown which the participants were asked to name as fast as possible. Analyses of their naming latencies revealed a statistically significant naming advantage of 106 ms on predictable over non-predictable trials. Moreover, we found that the objects’ naming advantage was predicted by the target words’ cloze probability in the sentences (r = .411, p = .016). In Experiment 2, the same sentences were used in a self-paced reading experiment. To allow for testing of potential spill-over effects, we added a neutral prepositional phrase (buys a beer from the bar keeper/drinks a beer from the shop) to each sentence. Participants (N = 54) read the sentences word-by-word, advancing by pushing the space bar. On 30% of the trials, comprehension questions were used to keep up participants' focus on comprehending the sentences. Analyses of participants’ target and post-target reading times revealed numerical advantages of 6 ms and 20 ms, respectively, in the predictable as compared to the non-predictable condition. However, in both cases, this difference was not statistically reliable (t = .757, t = 1.43) and the significant positive correlation between an item’s naming advantage and its cloze probability as seen in Experiment 1 was absent (r = .037, p = .822). Importantly, the analysis of participants' responses to the comprehension questions, showed that they understood the sentences (mean accuracy = 93%). To conclude, although both experiments used the same sentences, we observed effects of prediction only when the task included production. In Experiment 2, no evidence for anticipation was found although participants clearly understood the sentences and the method has previously been shown to be sensitive to measure prediction effects (Van Berkum et al., 2005). Our results fit with a recent study by Gollan et al. (2011) who found only a small processing advantage of predictive over non-predictive sentences in reading (using highly predictable sentences with a cloze probability > . 87) but a strong prediction effect when participants read the same sentences and carried out an additional object naming task (see also Griffin & Bock, 1998). Taken together, the studies suggest that the comprehenders' task set exerts a powerful influence on the likelihood and magnitude of predictive language processing. When the task set involves language production, as is often the case in natural conversation, comprehenders might engage in prediction to a stronger degree than in pure comprehension tasks. Being able to predict words another person is about to say might optimize the comprehension process and enable smooth turn-taking.