Capacity limits in sentence comprehension: Evidence from dual-task judgements and event-related potentials.

There is an ongoing controversy over whether readers can access the meaning of multiple words, simultaneously. To date, different experimental methods have generated seemingly contradictory evidence in support of serial or parallel processing accounts. For example, dual-task studies suggest that rea...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Cognition Vol. 225
Autor principal: Brothers, Trevor
Formato: Journal Article
Publicado: Elsevier B.V. Aug2022
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=157218180&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 157218180
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00100277
        3H9
      jtl: Cognition
      issn: 00100277
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Aug2022
      vid: 225
      pid: 1004
      pub: Elsevier B.V.
    artinfo:
      ui:
        157218180
        157218180
        NLM35551040
        157218180
        10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105153
        NLM35551040
        157218180
      ppct: 1
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Capacity limits in sentence comprehension: Evidence from dual-task judgements and event-related potentials.
      aug:
        au: Brothers, Trevor
        affil: Tufts University, Department of Psychology, United States of America
      sug:
        subj:
          Evoked Potentials Physiology
          Readability
          Language
          Female
          Male
          Electroencephalography
          Reading
          Semantics
          Female
          Male
      ab: There is an ongoing controversy over whether readers can access the meaning of multiple words, simultaneously. To date, different experimental methods have generated seemingly contradictory evidence in support of serial or parallel processing accounts. For example, dual-task studies suggest that readers can process a maximum of one word at a time (White, Palmer & Boynton, 2018), while ERP studies have demonstrated neural priming effects that are more consistent with parallel activation (Wen, Snell & Grainger, 2019). To help reconcile these views, I measured neural responses and behavioral accuracy in a dual-task sentence comprehension paradigm. Participants saw masked sentences and two-word phrases and had to judge whether or not they were grammatical. Grammatically correct sentences (This girl is neat) produced smaller N400 responses compared to scrambled sentences (Those girl is fled): an N400 sentence superiority effect. Critically, participants' grammaticality judgements on the same trials showed striking capacity limitations, with dual-task deficits closely matching the predictions of a serial, all-or-none processing account. Together, these findings suggest that the N400 sentence superiority effect is fully compatible with serial word recognition, and that readers are unable to process multiple sentence positions simultaneously.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N