It’s about time! Time as a parameter for lexical and syntactic processing: an eye-tracking-while-listening investigation

The effect of time on lexical and syntactic processing in aphasia

“…A total of 80 images were tested whereby participants were asked to write the name of the picture they saw. As described in Baker and Love (2021) , any image for which there was less than 70% semantic agreement was removed. This resulted in a total of 72 images (40 for matched experimental sentences, 32 for the filler sentences) that were used in the present experiment.…”

“…Experimental evidence has shown that in neurotypical adults and children (at least as young as 4 years of age), reactivation of the direct object occurs immediately at the gap position, resulting in the real-time formation of a syntactic dependency ( Akhavan, Blumenfeld, & Love, 2020 , 2022 ; Baker & Love, 2021 ; Koring, Mak, & Reuland, 2012 ; T. E. Love, 2007 ; Roberts, Marinis, Felser, & Clahsen, 2007 ; Thompson & Choy, 2009 , 2009 , p. 200). Although object-relative sentences are, in general, correctly comprehended by neurologically healthy adults, studies investigating real-time dependency linking have found that this process can be slowed or made more difficult in certain circumstances ( Gennari & MacDonald, 2008 ; Gibson, 1998 ; Gordon, Hendrick, & Johnson, 2001 , 2002 ; Traxler, Morris, & Seely, 2002 ).…”

“…To explore ways in which additional time could be provided without presenting sentence stimuli outside the typical speech rate, Baker and Love (2021) used discrete temporal additions to investigate how time affects processing in unimpaired young adults. Eye-tracking-while-listening was used to explore whether extra time modulates the time-course and activation levels of lexical access during comprehension.…”

“…In the present study, we use the same methodology and temporal manipulations from Baker and Love (2021) to explore if providing additional time for processing the target direct-object noun will 1) enhance lexical processing for both IWA and AMC, 2) facilitate downstream dependency linking (via modulating interference) for both IWA and AMC, and 3) improve sentence comprehension for IWA. Eye-tracking-while-listening in a visual world paradigm allows us to explore how additional time at a specific location in the sentence affects lexical processing, dependency linking, and interference resolution and ( Akhavan et al, 2020 , 2022 ; Baker & Love, 2021 ; Sekerina, Campanelli, & Van Dyke, 2016 ; Sheppard, Walenski, Love, & Shapiro, 2015 ). In this paradigm, participants are presented with an array of four pictures while listening to sentences: two of the pictures depict referents mentioned in the sentence and the other two pictures are distractors.…”

“…The competition arising from similarity-based interference can slow retrieval of the target noun ( Van Dyke & McElree, 2006 ). In eye-tracking data, this interference is shown as an extended activation of both nouns during the post-verb time window and is visualized as overlapping gaze patterns of both nouns ( Akhavan et al, 2020 , 2022 ; Baker & Love, 2021 ). In cases where interference is resolved, eye gazes show a greater divergence between looks to each noun.…”