Megan A Boudewyn, Yaqi Xu, Ashley R Rosenfeld, Nathan P Caines
{"title":"Common sources of linguistic conflict engage domain-general conflict control mechanisms during language comprehension.","authors":"Megan A Boudewyn, Yaqi Xu, Ashley R Rosenfeld, Nathan P Caines","doi":"10.3758/s13415-025-01267-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The current study tested the hypothesis that lexical ambiguity, a common source of representational conflict during language comprehension, engages domain-general cognitive control processes that are reflected by theta-band oscillations in scalp-recorded electroencephalograms (EEG). In Experiment 1, we examined the neural signature elicited by lexically ambiguous compared to unambiguous words during sentence comprehension. The results showed that midfrontal theta activity was increased in response to linguistic conflict (lexical ambiguity). In Experiment 2, we examined postconflict adaptation effects by comparing temporarily ambiguous sentences that followed previous instances of conflict (other temporarily ambiguous sentences) to those that followed a previous low-conflict (unambiguous) sentence. A midfrontal theta effect associated with linguistic conflict was again found in Experiment 2, such that theta was increased for temporarily ambiguous sentences that followed previous low-conflict (unambiguous) sentences compared with those that followed previous high-conflict (temporarily ambiguous) sentences. In both experiments, facilitated lexical semantic processing was also observed for words that came after the point of conflict, which may reflect a downstream \"benefit\" of cognitive control engagement. Overall, our results provide novel insights into the neurocognitive mechanisms underlying conflict processing in language comprehension and suggest that the same neural computations are involved in processing nonlinguistic and linguistic conflict.</p>","PeriodicalId":50672,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-025-01267-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The current study tested the hypothesis that lexical ambiguity, a common source of representational conflict during language comprehension, engages domain-general cognitive control processes that are reflected by theta-band oscillations in scalp-recorded electroencephalograms (EEG). In Experiment 1, we examined the neural signature elicited by lexically ambiguous compared to unambiguous words during sentence comprehension. The results showed that midfrontal theta activity was increased in response to linguistic conflict (lexical ambiguity). In Experiment 2, we examined postconflict adaptation effects by comparing temporarily ambiguous sentences that followed previous instances of conflict (other temporarily ambiguous sentences) to those that followed a previous low-conflict (unambiguous) sentence. A midfrontal theta effect associated with linguistic conflict was again found in Experiment 2, such that theta was increased for temporarily ambiguous sentences that followed previous low-conflict (unambiguous) sentences compared with those that followed previous high-conflict (temporarily ambiguous) sentences. In both experiments, facilitated lexical semantic processing was also observed for words that came after the point of conflict, which may reflect a downstream "benefit" of cognitive control engagement. Overall, our results provide novel insights into the neurocognitive mechanisms underlying conflict processing in language comprehension and suggest that the same neural computations are involved in processing nonlinguistic and linguistic conflict.
期刊介绍:
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience (CABN) offers theoretical, review, and primary research articles on behavior and brain processes in humans. Coverage includes normal function as well as patients with injuries or processes that influence brain function: neurological disorders, including both healthy and disordered aging; and psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia and depression. CABN is the leading vehicle for strongly psychologically motivated studies of brain–behavior relationships, through the presentation of papers that integrate psychological theory and the conduct and interpretation of the neuroscientific data. The range of topics includes perception, attention, memory, language, problem solving, reasoning, and decision-making; emotional processes, motivation, reward prediction, and affective states; and individual differences in relevant domains, including personality. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience is a publication of the Psychonomic Society.