令人不快的词语会影响对语态句法错误的检测:关于个体差异的ERP研究。

IF 2.9 2区 心理学 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES Psychophysiology Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-31 DOI:10.1111/psyp.14663
Lucia Vieitez, Isabel Padrón, Marcos Díaz-Lago, Iria de Dios-Flores, Isabel Fraga
{"title":"令人不快的词语会影响对语态句法错误的检测:关于个体差异的ERP研究。","authors":"Lucia Vieitez, Isabel Padrón, Marcos Díaz-Lago, Iria de Dios-Flores, Isabel Fraga","doi":"10.1111/psyp.14663","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In recent years, several ERP studies have investigated whether the early computation of agreement is permeable to the emotional content of words. Some studies have reported interactive effects of grammaticality and emotionality in the left anterior negativity (LAN) component, while others have failed to replicate these results. Furthermore, novel findings suggest that grammatical processing can elicit different neural patterns across individuals. In this study, we aim to investigate whether the interaction between grammaticality and emotionality is restricted to participants with a specific neural profile. Sixty-one female native speakers of Spanish performed an agreement judgment task in noun phrases composed of a determiner, a noun, and an unpleasant or neutral adjective that could agree or disagree in gender with the preceding noun. Our results support the existence of two different brain profiles: negative and positive dominance (individuals showing either larger LAN or larger P600 amplitudes in ungrammatical stimuli than in grammatical ones, respectively). Interestingly, the neural pattern of these two groups diverged at different points along the time course. Thus, the negative dominance group showed grammaticality effects as early as 200 ms, along with parallel and autonomous processing of grammaticality and emotionality at the LAN/N400 time window. Instead, for the positive dominance group an early interaction was found at around 200 ms, evidencing a grammaticality effect that emerged only for unpleasant words. Our findings confirm the role of individual differences in the interplay between grammar and emotion at the neural level and call for the inclusion of this perspective in studies on syntactic processing.</p>","PeriodicalId":20913,"journal":{"name":"Psychophysiology","volume":" ","pages":"e14663"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unpleasant words can affect the detection of morphosyntactic errors: An ERP study on individual differences.\",\"authors\":\"Lucia Vieitez, Isabel Padrón, Marcos Díaz-Lago, Iria de Dios-Flores, Isabel Fraga\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/psyp.14663\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In recent years, several ERP studies have investigated whether the early computation of agreement is permeable to the emotional content of words. Some studies have reported interactive effects of grammaticality and emotionality in the left anterior negativity (LAN) component, while others have failed to replicate these results. Furthermore, novel findings suggest that grammatical processing can elicit different neural patterns across individuals. In this study, we aim to investigate whether the interaction between grammaticality and emotionality is restricted to participants with a specific neural profile. Sixty-one female native speakers of Spanish performed an agreement judgment task in noun phrases composed of a determiner, a noun, and an unpleasant or neutral adjective that could agree or disagree in gender with the preceding noun. Our results support the existence of two different brain profiles: negative and positive dominance (individuals showing either larger LAN or larger P600 amplitudes in ungrammatical stimuli than in grammatical ones, respectively). Interestingly, the neural pattern of these two groups diverged at different points along the time course. Thus, the negative dominance group showed grammaticality effects as early as 200 ms, along with parallel and autonomous processing of grammaticality and emotionality at the LAN/N400 time window. Instead, for the positive dominance group an early interaction was found at around 200 ms, evidencing a grammaticality effect that emerged only for unpleasant words. Our findings confirm the role of individual differences in the interplay between grammar and emotion at the neural level and call for the inclusion of this perspective in studies on syntactic processing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20913,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychophysiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e14663\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychophysiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.14663\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.14663","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,有几项ERP研究探讨了协议的早期计算是否可渗透到词语的情感内容。一些研究报告了语法性和情感性在左前负性(LAN)成分中的交互效应,而另一些研究则未能复制这些结果。此外,新的研究结果表明,语法加工可以引起不同个体的不同神经模式。在本研究中,我们旨在探讨语法性和情感性之间的相互作用是否仅限于具有特定神经特征的参与者。61 名以西班牙语为母语的女性在由定语、名词和不愉快或中性形容词组成的名词短语中完成了一项一致性判断任务,这些名词短语在性别上可能与前一个名词一致或不一致。我们的研究结果支持存在两种不同的大脑图谱:消极优势和积极优势(与语法刺激相比,个体在非语法刺激中分别表现出更大的 LAN 或更大的 P600 振幅)。有趣的是,这两组人的神经模式在时间进程的不同点上出现了分化。因此,阴性优势组早在 200 毫秒时就表现出语法效应,并在 LAN/N400 时间窗时表现出语法和情感的平行自主加工。相反,积极优势组在 200 毫秒左右就发现了早期交互作用,证明语法效应只出现在不愉快的词语上。我们的研究结果证实了个体差异在神经层面语法和情感之间相互作用中的作用,并呼吁将这一观点纳入句法加工的研究中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Unpleasant words can affect the detection of morphosyntactic errors: An ERP study on individual differences.

In recent years, several ERP studies have investigated whether the early computation of agreement is permeable to the emotional content of words. Some studies have reported interactive effects of grammaticality and emotionality in the left anterior negativity (LAN) component, while others have failed to replicate these results. Furthermore, novel findings suggest that grammatical processing can elicit different neural patterns across individuals. In this study, we aim to investigate whether the interaction between grammaticality and emotionality is restricted to participants with a specific neural profile. Sixty-one female native speakers of Spanish performed an agreement judgment task in noun phrases composed of a determiner, a noun, and an unpleasant or neutral adjective that could agree or disagree in gender with the preceding noun. Our results support the existence of two different brain profiles: negative and positive dominance (individuals showing either larger LAN or larger P600 amplitudes in ungrammatical stimuli than in grammatical ones, respectively). Interestingly, the neural pattern of these two groups diverged at different points along the time course. Thus, the negative dominance group showed grammaticality effects as early as 200 ms, along with parallel and autonomous processing of grammaticality and emotionality at the LAN/N400 time window. Instead, for the positive dominance group an early interaction was found at around 200 ms, evidencing a grammaticality effect that emerged only for unpleasant words. Our findings confirm the role of individual differences in the interplay between grammar and emotion at the neural level and call for the inclusion of this perspective in studies on syntactic processing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychophysiology
Psychophysiology 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
8.10%
发文量
225
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Founded in 1964, Psychophysiology is the most established journal in the world specifically dedicated to the dissemination of psychophysiological science. The journal continues to play a key role in advancing human neuroscience in its many forms and methodologies (including central and peripheral measures), covering research on the interrelationships between the physiological and psychological aspects of brain and behavior. Typically, studies published in Psychophysiology include psychological independent variables and noninvasive physiological dependent variables (hemodynamic, optical, and electromagnetic brain imaging and/or peripheral measures such as respiratory sinus arrhythmia, electromyography, pupillography, and many others). The majority of studies published in the journal involve human participants, but work using animal models of such phenomena is occasionally published. Psychophysiology welcomes submissions on new theoretical, empirical, and methodological advances in: cognitive, affective, clinical and social neuroscience, psychopathology and psychiatry, health science and behavioral medicine, and biomedical engineering. The journal publishes theoretical papers, evaluative reviews of literature, empirical papers, and methodological papers, with submissions welcome from scientists in any fields mentioned above.
期刊最新文献
Reference values for heart rate variability in older adults: A systematic review. Unpleasant words can affect the detection of morphosyntactic errors: An ERP study on individual differences. Nothing to lose? Neural correlates of decision, anticipation, and feedback in the balloon analog risk task. Momentary autonomic engagement during parent-adolescent conflict: Coping as a moderator of associations with emotions. Pupillometry as a biomarker of postural control: Deep-learning models reveal side-specific pupillary responses to increased intensity of balance tasks.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1