2016
DOI: 10.1080/23273798.2015.1128554
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On putative shortcomings and dangerous future avenues: response to Strijkers & Costa

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, neurophysiological studies may show early activity in motor cortex during the production of speech, suggesting parallel processes. However, as pointed out by 19 , such early activity in motor cortex may reflect sequential semantic processing that relies on embodied representations. In other words, the current data on the dynamics of brain activity cannot be used to distinguish between theoretical proposals on the timecourse of cognitive and linguistic components during speech production.…”
Section: Icmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…For example, neurophysiological studies may show early activity in motor cortex during the production of speech, suggesting parallel processes. However, as pointed out by 19 , such early activity in motor cortex may reflect sequential semantic processing that relies on embodied representations. In other words, the current data on the dynamics of brain activity cannot be used to distinguish between theoretical proposals on the timecourse of cognitive and linguistic components during speech production.…”
Section: Icmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…However, our current data have no bearing on the conclusions reached by these studies. Indeed as argued by 19 , even though brain activity in areas subserving speech production may be parallel, the cognitive and linguistic components that are computed by this parallel activity may nevertheless proceed in a serial manner (see discussion between 19,25 ). For example, neurophysiological studies may show early activity in motor cortex during the production of speech, suggesting parallel processes.…”
Section: Icmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, proponents of sequential brain language models remain skeptical whether such early parallel activation of lexical and phonological word representations is plausible. One frequently uttered reservation concerns the possibility that these early effects highlight sensorial and/or attentional differences between stimuli-sets rather than linguistic brain activity (e.g., Hagoort, 2008; Mahon & Caramazza, 2008; Indefrey, 2016). Indeed, several of the studies showing that both lexical and phonological brain correlates within the first 200 ms of processing relied on physically different stimuli-sets (e.g., Strijkers et al, 2010; 2017; McGregor et al, 2012; Miozzo et al, 2015).…”
Section: Figurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here, we do not attempt to provide a comprehensive review of the rapidly growing literature on neuroimaging and electrophysiological evidence (for recent reviews and discussions, please see e.g. Zubicaray & Piai, 2019;Indefrey & Levelt, 2011;Indefrey, 2016;Munding et al, 2016;Piai, Riès, and Knight, 2015;Piai, 2016;Strijkers K. & Costa A., 2016). Instead, we selectively discuss neuro-cognitive evidence revealing additional information to evaluate the assumptions on semantic processing and the trade-off and temporal overlap between conceptual priming and competitive lexical selection.…”
Section: Neurocognitive Evidencementioning
confidence: 99%