2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.dcn.2016.09.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impact of associative word learning on phonotactic processing in 6-month-old infants: A combined EEG and fNIRS study

Abstract: During early language development native phonotactics are acquired in a 'bottom-up' fashion, relying on exquisite auditory differentiation skills operational from birth. Since basic lexico-semantic abilities have been demonstrated from 6 months onwards, 'top-down' influences on phonotactic learning may complement the extraction of transitional probabilities in phonotactic learning. Such a bidirectional acquisition strategy predicts, that familiarization with (proto)words should affect processing of untrained w… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
16
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 67 publications
1
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Based on previous studies in infants (e.g., Benavides-Varela, Gómez, & Mehler, 2011;Cheng et al, 2012;Minagawa-Kawai et al, 2011;Saito et al, 2007;Sato et al, 2012;Taga & Asakawa, 2007;Zhang et al, 2014) and adults (e.g., Brück et al, 2011;Frühholz, Trost, & Kotz, 2016), we placed the optodes over temporal, frontal, and central regions of the brain, using a NIRS-EEG compatible cap of 32 cm diameter (EASYCAP, Herrsching, Germany) in accordance with the international 10/10 system. There were 48 useful channels (24 per hemisphere), where source and detector were at a mean distance of 2.5 cm ( Figure 2; see also Altvater-Mackensen & Grossmann, 2016;Bennett, Bolling, Anderson, Pelphrey, & Kaiser, 2014;Obrig et al, 2017;Quaresima, Bisconti, & Ferrari, 2012;Telkemeyer et al, 2009). The distance between source and detector in each channel is shown in Table 2.…”
Section: Nirs Data Recordingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on previous studies in infants (e.g., Benavides-Varela, Gómez, & Mehler, 2011;Cheng et al, 2012;Minagawa-Kawai et al, 2011;Saito et al, 2007;Sato et al, 2012;Taga & Asakawa, 2007;Zhang et al, 2014) and adults (e.g., Brück et al, 2011;Frühholz, Trost, & Kotz, 2016), we placed the optodes over temporal, frontal, and central regions of the brain, using a NIRS-EEG compatible cap of 32 cm diameter (EASYCAP, Herrsching, Germany) in accordance with the international 10/10 system. There were 48 useful channels (24 per hemisphere), where source and detector were at a mean distance of 2.5 cm ( Figure 2; see also Altvater-Mackensen & Grossmann, 2016;Bennett, Bolling, Anderson, Pelphrey, & Kaiser, 2014;Obrig et al, 2017;Quaresima, Bisconti, & Ferrari, 2012;Telkemeyer et al, 2009). The distance between source and detector in each channel is shown in Table 2.…”
Section: Nirs Data Recordingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A further, more methodologically oriented explanation is the application of inappropriate baselines during data averaging 66 , especially in event-related designs with short stimuli as applied in our study. However, a GLM approach can handle with such phenomena 65,66 and was already successfully adopted by our research group 67 . The "neuronal inhibition" hypothesis 68,69 and the "vascular stealing" hypothesis 66,70 provide another explanation for inverted responses by attributing a decrease in activation to stimulus repetition and more importantly to an attentional shift.…”
Section: Fnirsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Artifacts were removed by a linear spline interpolation approach which has been frequently used (e.g. 67 ,) and is preferred compared to methods rejecting artifact-contaminated segments 89,90 as it allows keeping a large amount of data 89 . A 0.4 Hz low pass filter (Butterworth, third order) was applied to attenuate high-frequency artifacts mainly arising from heartbeat.…”
Section: Fnirs Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Thus, the two papers that use this method conceptually bear more on the effects of phonotactic learning than the acquisition of phonotactic patterns, and empirically use a testing phase that is very different from all other phonotactic studies. The third was a neuroimaging study, with a rather different presentation procedure compared to the others (Obrig et al, 2016). During pre-and post-test a set of pseudowords were presented to 6-month-olds; some pseudowords contained phonotactic patterns absent from the infants' native language, whereas others respected the infants' language phonotactics.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%