Hemispheric asymmetry in interpreting novel literal language: An event-related potential study

Davenport, Tristan; Coulson, Seana

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.01.018

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, Coulson and Van Petten (2007) observed larger anterior PNPs to less, relative to more, expected sentence endings, but only with presentation to the RVF/LH. Davenport and Coulson (2013) reported similar results.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 63%

“…Outcome B would suggest similar engagement by both hemispheres in responding to mis-predicted words. Outcome C would be consistent with the LH being additionally/differentially engaged when surprising but plausible input is encountered (consistent with Coulson and Van Petten, 2007, Davenport and Coulson, 2013). Outcome C would also align with Federmeier (2007) proposal of the LH being biased toward predictive language processing, with the idea that the LH also deals differently than the RH with consequences of mis-prediction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 64%

“…However, evidence for such PNPs in subsequent hemispheric ERP work is mixed. Although Coulson and Van Petten (2007), as well as Davenport and Coulson (2013), observed LH-biased anterior PNPs to less expected sentence continuations, Wlotko and Federmeier (2007)—specifically testing for such a response—did not, leading them to suggest that the central presentation anterior PNP response to prediction violations may emerge only through hemispheric cooperation. In the current study, our finding of a constraint violation-graded anterior PNP for RVF/LH-biased processing is thus a novel, and important, result, because it demonstrates that at least under some circumstances, the hemispheres exhibit differential prediction-related processing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Such patterns might manifest with presentation of unexpected continuations to (A) neither, (B) both or (C) predominantly one visual field (likely the RVF/LH). Although a few studies have indicated that the anterior PNP may be more prevalent when constraint violations are presented to the RVF/LH (e.g., Coulson and Van Petten, 2007; Davenport and Coulson, 2013), this has not been a consistent finding (specifically, Wlotko and Federmeier, 2007 did not show this pattern). Thus, Outcome A would be consistent with the findings of Wlotko and Federmeier (2007), in suggesting that the anterior PNP emerges only through bicameral cooperation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Thornhill and Van Petten (2012) and Kuperberg (2013) suggest that it indexes a sensitivity to specific lexical word forms, rather than to conceptual expectations. Other proposals range from inhibition of expected but not encountered words (Kutas, 1993), to arguments that it relates to a learning/adaptation mechanism (Kuperberg and Jaeger, 2016; Davenport and Coulson, 2013), where mental models are updated to reflect probabilities in the current environment. Kuperberg and Jaeger (2016) also suggest that PNPs may index a sort of “model switching”, reflecting a reallocation of resources to a model corresponding to more immediate statistical patterns.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Hemispheric differences and similarities in comprehending more and less predictable sentences

DeLong

Kutas

2016

Neuropsychologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With a growing literature demonstrating the predictive nature of language processing, the current study examines contributions of the brain’s two hemispheres in processing more and less probable sentence continuations. Specifically, we use the ERP method in conjunction with the visual half-field paradigm to test for hemispheric utilization of sentential constraint to (pre-)activate lexical information and resolve meaning. Taking advantage of the N400’s semantic sensitivities, we find support for both hemispheres exhibiting remarkably similar involvement, across a range of message level constraint, in meaning construction. In contrast, hemispheric ERP patterns at a later processing stage differed, as reflected in an anterior post-N400 positivity (PNP) to constraint violations for words presented to the right but not left visual field (indicating a left hemisphere processing bias). We show here that hemispheric involvement in predictive sentence comprehension varies at different stages of word processing, and we examine these patterns’ (in)consistencies with findings from the hemi-field and central visual presentation literature.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 63%