Displaying 1 - 5 of 5
-
Hustá, C., Nieuwland, M. S., & Meyer, A. S. (2022). Capturing the attentional trade-off between speech planning and comprehension: Evidence from the N100. Poster presented at the IMPRS Conference 2022, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
-
Hustá, C., Nieuwland, M. S., & Meyer, A. S. (2022). Electrophysiological signatures of speech planning during comprehension. Poster presented at the 18th NVP Winter Conference on Brain and Cognition, Egmond aan Zee, The Netherlands.
-
Nieuwland, M. S., Petersson, K. M., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2007). On sense and reference: Examining the functional neuroanatomy of referential processing. Poster presented at the 14th Annual meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society (CNS 2007), New York, USA.
Abstract
In an event-related fMRI study, we investigated to what extent semantic and
referential aspects of language comprehension recruit common or dis-
tinct neural ensembles. We compared BOLD responses to sentences containing semantically anomalous or coherent words, and to sentences containing referentially ambiguous pronouns (e.g., “Ronald told Frank that he...”), referentially failing pronouns (e.g., “Rose told Emily that he...”) or coherent pronouns. Semantic anomaly elicited activation increases in lateral prefrontal brain regions associated with semantic pro-
cessing. Referential failure elicited
activation increases in brain regions
associated with morphosyntactic processing, and additional activations
associated with elaborative inferenc
ing if readers took failing pronouns
to refer to unmentioned entities. Referential ambiguity selectively
recruited medial prefrontal regions,
suggesting that readers engaged in
problem-solving to select a unique
referent from the discourse model.
Furthermore, our results showed that semantic anomaly and referential
ambiguity recruit overlapping neural ensembles in opposite directions,
possibly reflecting the dynamic re
cruitment of semantic and episodic
processing to resolve semantically or referentially problematic situations.
These findings suggest that neurocogni
tive accounts of language compre-
hension will have to address not just how we parse a sentence and com-
bine individual word meanings, bu
t also how we determine who’s who
and what’s what during sentence and discourse comprehension -
Nieuwland, M. S., Otten, M., & van Berkum, J. J. (2007). Who are you talking about? Tracking discourse-level referential processing with ERPs. Poster presented at the Brain Mechanisms and Cognitive Processes in the Comprehension of Discourse, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Abstract
In this event-related brain potentials (E RP) study, we explored the possibility to selectively track referential ambiguity during spoken discourse comprehension. Earlier ERP research has shown that referentially am biguous nouns (e.g., “the girl” in a two-girl context) elicit a frontal, sustained negative sh ift relative to unambiguous control words. In the current study, we examined whether this ERP effect reflec ts ‘deep’ situation model ambiguity or ‘superficial’ textbase am biguity. We contrast ed these different interpretations by investigating whether a discourse-level semantic manipulation that prevents referential ambiguity also averts t he elicitation of a referentially induced ERP effect. We compared ERPs el icited by nouns that were re ferentially non-ambiguous but were associated with two discourse entities (e .g., “the girl” with two girls introduced in the context, but one of which has died or le ft the scene), with referentially ambiguous and non-ambiguous control words. While temporally referentially ambiguous nouns elicited a frontal negative shift compared to control words, the ‘double bo und’ but referentially non-ambiguous nouns did not. These results suggest that it is possible to selectively track referential ambiguity with ERPs at the level that is most relev ant to discourse comprehension, the situation model -
Van Berkum, J. J. A., Holleman, B. C., Murre, J. M. C., Nieuwland, M. S., & Otten, M. (2007). So how do you feel about this? An ERP study on opinion poll comprehension. Poster presented at Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society (CNS-2007), New York.
Share this page