Discourse Expectations Are Sensitive to the Question Under Discussion: Evidence From ERPs

References

• Almor, A. (1999). Noun-phrase anaphors and focus: The informational load hypothesis. Psychological Review, 106, 748–765.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almor, A. (2000). Constraints and mechanisms in theories of anaphor processing. In M. Pickering, C. Clifton, & M. Crocker (Eds.), Architectures and mechanisms for language processing (341–354). England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Almor, A., & Eimas, P. D. (2008). Focus and noun phrase anaphors in spoken language comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(2), 201–225. doi:10.1080/01690960701330936
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Benz, A., & Jasinskaja, K. (2017). Questions under discussion: From sentence to discourse. Discourse Processes, 54(3), 177–186. doi:10.1080/0163853X.2017.1316038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bower, G. H. (1982). Plans and goals in understanding episodes. Advances in Psycholigy, 8, 2–15.
   Google Scholar
• Bower, G. H., & Morrow, D. G. (1990). Mental models in narrative comprehension. Science, 247, 44–48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bower, G. H., & Rinck, M. (1999). Goals as generators of activation in narrative understanding. In S. R. Goldman, A. C. Graesser, & P. van Den Broek (Eds.), Narrative comprehension causality and coherence: Essays in honor of Tom Trabasso (pp. 111–134). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Brennan, S. E. (1995). Centering attention in discourse. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10(2), 137–167. doi:10.1080/01690969508407091
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brouwer, H., Crocker, M. W., Venhuizen, N. J., & Hoeks, J. C. J, (2017). A neurocomputational model of the N400 and the P600 in language processing. Cognitive Science, 41(Suppl 6), 1318–1352. doi:10.1111/cogs.12461
   Google Scholar
• Brouwer, H., Fitz, H., & Hoeks, J. (2012). Getting real about semantic illusions: Rethinking the functional role of the P600 in language comprehension. Brain Research, 1446, 127–143. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2012.01.055
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burkhardt, P. (2006). Inferential bridging relations reveal distinct neural mechanisms: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Brain and Language, 98, 159–168. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2006.04.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burkhardt, P. (2007). The P600 reflects cost of new information in discourse memory. NeuroReport, 18(17), 1851–1854. doi:10.1097/WNR.0b013e3282f1a999
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burkhardt, P., & Roehm, D. (2007). Differential effects of saliency: An event-related brain potential study. Neuroscience Letters, 413, 115–120. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2006.11.038
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlson, L. (1983). Dialogue games: An approach to discourse analysis. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Reidel.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen, R. H. (2018). ordinal – Regression models for ordinal data. R package version 2018.8-25. Retrieved from http://www.cran.r-project.org/package=ordinal
   Google Scholar
• Clifton, C. J., & Frazier, L. (2012). Discourse integration guided by the ‘question under discussion’. Cognitive Psychology, 65(2), 352–379. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.04.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clifton, C. J., & Frazier, L. (2017). Context effects in discourse: The question under discussion. Discourse Processes, 55(2), 105–112. doi:10.1080/0163853X.2017.1330029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dambacher, M., Dimigen, O., Braun, M., Wille, K., Jacobs, A. M., & Kliegl, R. (2012). Stimulus onset asynchrony and the timeline of word recognition: Event-related potentials during sentence reading. Neuropsychologia, 50(8), 1852–1870. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.04.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delogu, F., Vespignani, F., & Sanford, A. J. (2010). Effects of intensionality on sentence and discourse processing: Evidence from eye-movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 62(4), 352–379. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2010.02.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ditman, T., Holcomb, P. J., & Kuperberg, G. R. (2007). An investigation of concurrent ERP and self-paced reading methodologies. Psychophysiology, 44(6), 927–935. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00593.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dwivedi, V. D., Phillips, N. A., Lague-Beauvais, M., & Baum, S. R. (2006). An electrophysiological study of mood, modal context, and anaphora. Brain Research, 1117(1), 135–153. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.07.048
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Egidi, G., & Gerrig, R. J. (2006). Readers’ experiences of characters’ goals and actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(6), 1322–1329. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.32.6.1322
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Federmeier, K. D., & Kutas, M. (1999). A rose by any other name: Long-term memory structure and sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 8(3), 373–392.
   Google Scholar
• Foster, K. (1970). Visual perception of rapidly presented word sequences of varying complexity. Percept, 8, 215–221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frazier, L. (2008). Processing ellipsis: A processing solution to the undergeneration problem. In C. Hang & H. Haynie (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th west coast conference on formal linguistics (WCCFL 26) (pp. 21–32). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, P. C., Grosz, B. J., & Gilliom, L. A. (1993). Pronouns, names, and the centering of attention in discourse. Cognitive Science, 17, 311–347. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1703_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grant, M., Clifton, C., & Frazier, L. (2012). The role of non-actuality implicatures in processing elided constituents. Journal of Memory and Language, 66(1), 326–343. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2011.09.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grosz, B. J., Joshi, A. K., & Weinstein, S. (1983). Providing a unified account of definite noun phrases in discourse. Proceedings of 21st annual meeting of the association of computational linguistics (pp. 44–50). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
   Google Scholar
• Hagoort, P., Brown, C., & Groothusen, J. (1993). The syntactic positive shift (SPS) as an ERP measure of syntactic processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 439–483. doi:10.1080/01690969308407585
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamblin, C. L. (1973). Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language, 10, 41–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hobbs, J. R. (1985). On the coherence and structure of discourse (CSLI Technical Report 85-37). Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford University, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Hoeks, J. C., Stowe, L. A., Hendriks, P., & Brouwer, H. (2013). Questions left unanswered: How the brain responds to missing information. PloS one, 8(10), e73594. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0073594
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huitema, J. S., Dopkins, S., Klin, C., & Myers, J. (1993). Connecting goals and actions during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1053–1060.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Karttunen, L. (1977). Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy, 1, 3–44. doi:10.1007/BF00351935
   Google Scholar
• Kehler, A. (2002). Coherence, reference, and the theory of grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publication.
   Google Scholar
• Kehler, A., & Rohde, H. (2017). Evaluating an expectation-driven QUD model of discourse interpretation. Discourse Processes, 54(3), 219–238. doi:10.1080/0163853X.2016.1169069
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363–394. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kupietz, M., Belica, C., Keibel, H., & Witt, A. (2010). The German reference corpus Dereko: A primordial sample for linguistic research. In N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, J. Odijk, S. Piperidis, M. Rosner, & D. Tapias#x00A0; (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th conference on international language resources and evaluation (LREC) (pp. 1848–1854). Valletta, Malta: European Language Resources Association (ELRA).
   Google Scholar
• Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 621–647. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.131123
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nature, 307, 161–163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau, E. F., Phillips, C., & Poeppel, D. (2008). A cortical network for semantics: (de)constructing the N400. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9(12), 920–933. doi:10.1038/nrn2532
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ledoux, K., Gordon, P. C., Camblin, C. C., & Swaab, T. Y. (2007). Coreference and lexical repetition: Mechanisms of discourse integration. Memory & Cognition, 35(4), 801–915.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moltmann, F. (1997). Intensional verbs and quantifiers. Natural Language Semantics, 5, 1–52. doi:10.1023/A:1008245409172
   Google Scholar
• Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1992). Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 785–806. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(92)90039-Z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1995). Event-related potentials and language comprehension. In M. D. Rugg & M. G. H. Coles (Eds.), Electrophysiological studies of human cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, C. (1996). Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. OSU Working Papers in Linguistics, 49, 91–136.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, C. (2004). Context in dynamic interpretation. In L. Horn & G. Ward (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics(pp. 197–220). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, T. J. M., & Noordman, L. G. M. (2000). The role of coherence relations and their linguistic markers in text processing. Discourse Processes, 29(1), 37–60. doi:10.1207/S15326950dp2901_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharbrough, F., Chatrian, G.-E., Lesser, R. P., Lüders, H., Nuwer, M., & Picton, T. W. (1991). American electroencephalographic society guidelines for standard electrode position nomenclature. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 8, 200–202. doi:10.1097/00004691-199104000-00007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spotorno, N., Cheylus, A., Van Der Henst, J.-B., and Noveck, I. A. (2013). What’s behind a P600? integration operations during irony processing. PLoS ONE, 8:e66839. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0066839
   Google Scholar
• Steinhauer, K., & Drury, J. E. (2012). On the early left-anterior negativity (ELAN) in syntax studies. Brain and Language, 120, 135–162. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2011.07.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swaab, T. Y., Camblin, C. C., & Gordon, P. C. (2004). Electrophysiological evidence for reversed lexical repetition effects in language processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16(5), 715–726. doi:10.1162/089892904970744
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Den Broek, P. (1990). Causal inferences and the comprehension of narrative texts. In A. C. Graesser & G. H. Bower (Eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 25, pp. 175–196). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• van Kuppevelt, J., (1995). Discourse structure, topicality and questioning. Journal of Linguistics, 31(01), 109–147. doi:10.1017/S002222670000058X
   Google Scholar
• Van Geenhoven, V., & McNally, L. (2005). On the property analysis of opaque complements. Lingua, 115, 885–914. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2004.01.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiang, M., & Kuperberg, G. R. (2015). Reversing expectations during discourse comprehension. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(6), 648–672. doi:10.1080/23273798.2014.995679
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwaan, R. A., Langston, M. C., & Graesser, A. C. (1995). The construction of situation models in narrative comprehension: An event-indexing model. Psychological Science, 6(5), 292–297. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00513.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwaan, R. A., Magliano, J. P., & Graesser, A. C. (1995). Dimensions of situation model construction in narrative comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 386–397.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar