Evaluating the timecourses of morpho-orthographic, lexical, and grammatical processing following rapid parallel visual presentation: An EEG investigation in English
Donald Dunagan , Tyson Jordan , John T. Hale , Liina Pylkkänen , Dustin A. Chacón
{"title":"Evaluating the timecourses of morpho-orthographic, lexical, and grammatical processing following rapid parallel visual presentation: An EEG investigation in English","authors":"Donald Dunagan , Tyson Jordan , John T. Hale , Liina Pylkkänen , Dustin A. Chacón","doi":"10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Theories of language processing – and typical experimental methodologies – emphasize the word-by-word processing of sentences. This paradigm is good for approximating speech or careful text reading, but arguably, not for the common, cursory glances used while reading short sentences (e.g., cellphone notifications, social media posts). How can we interpret a sentence in a single glance? In an electroencephalography (EEG) study, brain responses to grammatical sentences (<em>the dogs chase a ball</em>) presented for 200 ms diverged from non-lexical consonant strings (<em>thj rjxb zkhtb w lhct</em>) ∼160 ms post-sentence onset and from scrambled constructions (<em>a dogs chase ball the</em>) ∼250 ms post-sentence onset, demonstrating – at different time points – rapid recognition and cursory analysis of linguistic stimuli. In the grammatical sentences, unigram probability correlated with EEG data ∼150–300 ms post-sentence onset, and probability of the word given its context estimated by BERT correlated with EEG data after ∼700–800 ms. EEG responses did not diverge between grammatical sentences and their counterparts with ungrammatical agreement (<em>the dogs chases a ball</em>), although EEG responses did diverge for plural vs. singular morphology at ∼200 ms. These results suggest that ‘at-a-glance’ reading is possible, based on coactivation of individual lexical items, morphological structures, and constituent structure at ∼200-300 ms, but that words are not integrated into a coherent syntactic/semantic analysis, as evidenced by the substantially later responses to BERT probability and the absence of sensitivity to agreement errors.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48455,"journal":{"name":"Cognition","volume":"257 ","pages":"Article 106080"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027725000204","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Theories of language processing – and typical experimental methodologies – emphasize the word-by-word processing of sentences. This paradigm is good for approximating speech or careful text reading, but arguably, not for the common, cursory glances used while reading short sentences (e.g., cellphone notifications, social media posts). How can we interpret a sentence in a single glance? In an electroencephalography (EEG) study, brain responses to grammatical sentences (the dogs chase a ball) presented for 200 ms diverged from non-lexical consonant strings (thj rjxb zkhtb w lhct) ∼160 ms post-sentence onset and from scrambled constructions (a dogs chase ball the) ∼250 ms post-sentence onset, demonstrating – at different time points – rapid recognition and cursory analysis of linguistic stimuli. In the grammatical sentences, unigram probability correlated with EEG data ∼150–300 ms post-sentence onset, and probability of the word given its context estimated by BERT correlated with EEG data after ∼700–800 ms. EEG responses did not diverge between grammatical sentences and their counterparts with ungrammatical agreement (the dogs chases a ball), although EEG responses did diverge for plural vs. singular morphology at ∼200 ms. These results suggest that ‘at-a-glance’ reading is possible, based on coactivation of individual lexical items, morphological structures, and constituent structure at ∼200-300 ms, but that words are not integrated into a coherent syntactic/semantic analysis, as evidenced by the substantially later responses to BERT probability and the absence of sensitivity to agreement errors.
期刊介绍:
Cognition is an international journal that publishes theoretical and experimental papers on the study of the mind. It covers a wide variety of subjects concerning all the different aspects of cognition, ranging from biological and experimental studies to formal analysis. Contributions from the fields of psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, computer science, mathematics, ethology and philosophy are welcome in this journal provided that they have some bearing on the functioning of the mind. In addition, the journal serves as a forum for discussion of social and political aspects of cognitive science.