Automatic processing of taxonomic and thematic relations in semantic priming — Differentiation by early N400 and late frontal negativity

Chen, Qingfei; Yuan, Chun; Xin, Liang; Cao, Bihua; Lei, Yi; Li, Hong

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.09.013

Cited by 30 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, such an RT advantage was not found for hierarchical relationships even at long SOA. These results were aligned with those of our previous study (Chen et al, 2014b), which found that the asymmetry representation of “category” and “member” in hierarchical relationships might be induced by other factors (e.g., the spatial arrangement), rather than temporal order.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…As a result, less than 6% of the data were lost due to artifacts, muscle potentials, and so on. Similar to our previous studies, we have labeled the word pairs as different marks when they are presented for the first time and when they are repeated in separate blocks, and there was no significant difference between them (Chen et al, 2014b, 2015). Thus, two types of stimulus were merged, which had the advantage of avoiding problems of category specificity and physical variance that are unavoidable when using large groups of words (Renoult, 2010).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…In Experiment 2, however, participants were required to assess whether the same pairs of words were generally associatively related. In the present study, all of the hierarchically and causally related word pairs, as well as the unrelated word pairs, were presented twice, to prevent a lack of sufficient numbers of appropriate pair types and to ensure no effect of order (Chen et al, 2014b; Liang et al, 2015). If the asymmetrical representations of hierarchical relationships were similar to causal relationships, similar pattern of results should be found.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Temporal Order of Word Presentation Modulates the Amplitudes of P2 and N400 during Recognition of Causal Relations

Xin

Xiao

et al. 2016

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The processing of causal relations has been constantly found to be asymmetrical once the roles of cause and effect are assigned to objects in interactions. We used a relationship recognition paradigm and recorded electroencephalographic (EEG) signals to explore the neural mechanism underlying the asymmetrical representations of causal relations in semantic memory. The results revealed that the verification of causal relations is faster if two words appear in “cause-effect” order (e.g., virus-epidemic) than if they appear in “effect-cause” order (e.g., epidemic-virus), whereas no such asymmetrical representation was found for the verification of hierarchical relations with reverse orders (e.g., bird-sparrow vs. sparrow-bird) in Experiment 1. Furthermore, the P2 amplitude elicited by “superordinate-subordinate” order was larger than that when in reverse order, whereas the N400 effect elicited by “cause-effect” order was smaller (more positive) than when in reverse order. However, no such asymmetry, as well as P2 and N400 components, were observed when verifying the existence of a general associative relation in Experiment 2. We suggested that the smaller N400 in cause-effect order indicates their increased salience in semantic memory relative to the effect-cause order. These results provide evidence for dissociable neural processes, which are related to role binding, contributing to the generation of causal asymmetry.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Temporal Order of Word Presentation Modulates the Amplitudes of P2 and N400 during Recognition of Causal Relations

Xin

Xiao

et al. 2016

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Differences in the neural substrates of thematic and taxonomic semantic relations have been investigated in several recent neuroimaging and patient studies (Chen et al, 2014; de Zubicaray et al, 2013; Jackson et al, 2015; Kalénine et al, 2009; G. a. Lewis et al, 2015; Maguire, Brier, & Ferree, 2010; Mirman & Graziano, 2012b; Sachs, Weis, Krings, Huber, & Kircher, 2008; Sachs et al, 2011; Sachs, Weis, Zellagui, et al, 2008; Sass et al, 2009; Schwartz et al, 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thematic knowledge, artifact concepts, and the left posterior temporal lobe: Where action and object semantics converge

Kalénine

Buxbaum

2016

Cortex

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Converging evidence supports the existence of functionally and neuroanatomically distinct taxonomic (similarity-based; e.g., hammer-screwdriver) and thematic (event-based; e.g., hammer-nail) semantic systems. Processing of thematic relations between objects has been shown to selectively recruit the left posterior temporoparietal cortex. Similar posterior regions have been also been shown to be critical for knowledge of relationships between actions and manipulable human-made objects (artifacts). Based on the hypothesis that thematic relationships for artifacts are based, at least in part, on action relationships, we assessed the prediction that the same regions of the left posterior temporoparietal cortex would be critical for conceptual processing of artifact-related actions and thematic relations for artifacts. To test this hypothesis, we evaluated processing of taxonomic and thematic relations for artifact and natural objects as well as artifact action knowledge (gesture recognition) abilities in a large sample of 48 stroke patients with a range of lesion foci in the left hemisphere. Like control participants, patients identified thematic relations faster than taxonomic relations for artifacts, whereas they identified taxonomic relations faster than thematic relations for natural objects. Moreover, response times for identifying thematic relations for artifacts selectively predicted performance in gesture recognition. Whole brain Voxel Based Lesion-Symptom Mapping (VLSM) analyses and Region of Interest (ROI) regression analyses further demonstrated that lesions to the left posterior temporal cortex, overlapping with LTO and visual motion area hMT+, were associated both with relatively slower response times in identifying thematic relations for artifacts and poorer artifact action knowledge in patients. These findings provide novel insights into the functional role of left posterior temporal cortex in thematic knowledge, and suggest that the close association between thematic relations for artifacts and action representations may reflect their common dependence on visual motion and manipulation information.

show abstract

“…), which shares an associative relationship but not perceptual features [11,25,49]. Taxonomic relations seem to be processed semantically by retrieving category knowledge, while thematic relations are more likely to be processed automatically [10,25]. Alternatively, Kalénine et al suggested that taxonomic relations rely on perceptual processes while thematic relations rely on event/action processing [24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inductive reasoning differs between taxonomic and thematic contexts: Electrophysiological evidence

Liu

Han

Ling-cong

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inductive reasoning can be performed in different contexts, but it is unclear whether the neural mechanism of inductive reasoning performed in a thematic context (e.g., panda has x, so bamboo has x) is the same as that performed in a taxonomic context (e.g., panda has x, so bear has x). In the present study, participants were required to judge whether a conclusion was acceptable or not based on its premise, for which the taxonomic or thematic distances between premise and conclusion objects were either far or near. The ERP results indicated that the effect of reasoning context (taxonomic vs. thematic) was initially observed in the P2 component; while the distance effect (far vs. near) was observed in N400 and late components. Moreover, the distance effect on thematic-based inductive reasoning was found in the frontal and frontalcentral brain regions, while the distance effect in taxonomic-based inductive reasoning conditions was found in the central-parietal and parietal regions. These results support the view that inductive reasoning is performed differently under different semantic contexts.

show abstract

Automatic processing of taxonomic and thematic relations in semantic priming — Differentiation by early N400 and late frontal negativity

Cited by 30 publications

References 35 publications

The Temporal Order of Word Presentation Modulates the Amplitudes of P2 and N400 during Recognition of Causal Relations

The Temporal Order of Word Presentation Modulates the Amplitudes of P2 and N400 during Recognition of Causal Relations

Thematic knowledge, artifact concepts, and the left posterior temporal lobe: Where action and object semantics converge

Inductive reasoning differs between taxonomic and thematic contexts: Electrophysiological evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About