Finding the right word: Hemispheric asymmetries in the use of sentence context information

Abstract

The cerebral hemispheres have been shown to be differentially sensitive to sentence-level information; in particular, it has been suggested that only the left hemisphere (LH) makes predictions about upcoming items, while the right (RH) processes words in a more integrative fashion. The current study used event-related potentials to jointly examine the effects of expectancy and sentential constraint on word processing. Expected and unexpected but plausible words matched for contextual fit were inserted into strongly and weakly constraining sentence frames and presented to the left and right visual fields (LVF and RVF). Consistent with the prediction/integration view, the P2 was sensitive to constraint: words in strongly constraining contexts elicited larger P2s than those in less predictive contexts, for RVF/lh presentation only. N400 responses for both VFs departed from the typical pattern of amplitudes graded by cloze probability. Expected endings in strongly and weakly constraining contexts were facilitated to a similar degree with RVF/lh presentation, and expected endings in weakly constraining contexts were not facilitated compared to unexpected endings in those contexts for LVF/rh presentation. These data suggest that responses seen for central presentation reflect contributions from both hemispheres. Finally, a late positivity, larger for unexpected endings in strongly constraining contexts, observed for these stimuli with central presentation was not seen here for either VF. Thus, some phenomena observed with central presentation may be an emergent property of mechanisms that require interhemispheric cooperation. These data highlight the importance of understanding hemispheric asymmetries and their implications for normal language processing.For over a century, language processing has been recognized as one of the most prominent examples of hemispheric asymmetry in cerebral function. The fact that language function can be severely disrupted after damage to the left hemisphere (LH), whereas language deficits after right hemisphere (RH) damage are often much more subtle, led to the initial inference that most or all language processing arises from LH functions. More recently, an extensive body of evidence from behavioral, neuropsychological, electrophysiological, and hemodynamic neuroimaging studies has demonstrated not only that language comprehension is composed of bilateral processes, but also that the two hemispheres make qualitatively different contributions to comprehension (see, e.g., . Such findings underscore the necessity of uncovering the nature of, and the differences between, the processing computations Corresponding author: Edward W. Wlotko, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 603 E. Daniel Street MC 716, Champaign, IL 61820, phone: (217) 244-7334, fax: (217) 244-5876, email: ewwlotko@alumni.pitt Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providi...

Language structure in the brain: A fixation-related fMRI study of syntactic surprisal in reading

“…They found that thalamic areas systematically responded to syntactic and semantic errors during auditory language comprehension. Fifth, the observed right hemisphere IFG activation (along with the left IFG activation) is consistent with the bilateral IFG activation sometimes observed in tasks that reflect linguistic expectations (Bonhage et al, 2015;Wlotko and Federmeier, 2007).…”

Lexical versus conceptual anticipation during sentence processing: Frontal positivity and N400 ERP components

“…Although lateral asymmetries on the scalp do not always follow neurophysiological asymmetries (Van Petten and Luka, 2006), a left-hemisphere dominance for the frontal PNP is strongly suggested by Coulson and Van Petten's (2007) observation of much larger amplitudes when sentence-final words were presented to the right visual field as compared to the left visual field. Surprisingly however, Wlotko and Federmeier (2007) failed to observe a PNP effect for words presented to either the right or left visual fields using the same sentence materials as their prior study with midline presentation , so that the hemispheric asymmetry requires further confirmation.…”

Prediction during language comprehension: Benefits, costs, and ERP components

“…The idea is that high constraint sentences encourage strong predictions and low constraint sentences encourage weak predictions. The discrepancy between contextual constraint and cloze probability has intuitive appeal for quantifying the strength with which a prediction is disconfirmed, so that this idea has been applied in many other papers, including one from our lab (Federmeier, 2007;Federmeier et al, 2002Federmeier et al, , 2007Hoeks et al, 2004;Otten and van Berkum, 2008;Van Petten et al, 1999;Vissers et al, 2006;Wlotko and Federmeier, 2007). With one exception (Hoeks et al, 2004), the results have been uniform: N400 amplitude is closely tied to the match between the context and the word presented -cloze probability -but independent of the discrepancy between constraint and cloze.…”