Presentation format affects the behavioural and neural processing costs of sentence reinterpretation

References

• Anwyl-Irvine, A. L., Massonnié, J., Flitton, A., Kirkham, N., & Evershed, J. K. (2019). Gorilla in our midst: An online behavioral experiment builder. Behavior Research Methods, 52, 388–407. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01237-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashburner, J., & Friston, K. J. (2005). Unified segmentation. NeuroImage, 26(3), 839–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.02.018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database (release 2). Distributed by the Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.
   Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., & Baayen, H. (2015). Parsimonious Mixed Models. ArXiv:1506.04967 [Stat]. http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.04967
   Google Scholar
• Binder, J. R., Desai, R. H., Graves, W. W., & Conant, L. L. (2009). Where is the semantic system? A critical review and meta-analysis of 120 functional neuroimaging studies. Cerebral Cortex, 19(12), 2767–2796. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhp055
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blank, I. A., & Fedorenko, E. (2020). No evidence for differences among language regions in their temporal receptive windows. NeuroImage, 219, 116925.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blesser, B. (1972). Speech Perception Under Conditions of Spectral Transformation: I. Phonetic Characteristics. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 15(1), 5–41. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.1501.05
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Blott, L. M., Rodd, J. M., Ferreira, F., & Warren, J. E. (2021). Recovery from misinterpretations during online sentence processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 47(6), 968–997. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000936
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonhage, C. E., Mueller, J. L., Friederici, A. D., & Fiebach, C. J. (2015). Combined eye tracking and fMRI reveals neural basis of linguistic predictions during sentence comprehension. Cortex, 68, 33–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2015.04.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bookheimer, S. (2002). Functional MRI of language: New approaches to understanding the cortical organization of semantic processing. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 25(1), 151–188. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.25.112701.142946
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braze, D., Mencl, W. E., Tabor, W., Pugh, K. R., Todd Constable, R., Fulbright, R. K., … Shankweiler, D. P. (2011). Unification of sentence processing via ear and eye: An fMRI study. Cortex, 47(4), 416–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2009.11.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brett, M., Anton, J. L., Valabregue, R., & Poline, J. B. (2002, June). Region of interest analysis using an SPM toolbox. In 8th International Conference on Functional Mapping of the Human Brain, 16(2), 497.
   Google Scholar
• Caplan, D. (2004). Functional neuroimaging studies of written sentence comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 8(3), 225–240. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0803_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christianson, K., Hollingworth, A., Halliwell, J. F., & Ferreira, F. (2001). Thematic roles assigned along the garden path linger. Cognitive Psychology, 42(4), 368–407. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.2001.0752
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crinion, J. T., Lambon-Ralph, M. A., Warburton, E. A., Howard, D., & Wise, R. J. S. (2003). Temporal lobe regions engaged during normal speech comprehension. Brain, 126(5), 1193–1201. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awg104
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Curtis, C. E., & D’Esposito, M. (2003). Persistent activity in the prefrontal cortex during working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(9), 415–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00197-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damer, E., & Bradley, P. (2014). Prolific Academic: Prolific Academic Ltd. (prolific.ac). Available at www.prolific.ac
   Google Scholar
• Diachek, E., Blank, I., Siegelman, M., Affourtit, J., & Fedorenko, E. (2020). The domain-general multiple demand (MD) network does not support core aspects of language comprehension: a large-scale fMRI investigation. Journal of Neuroscience, 40(23), 4536–4550.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duffau, H. (2017). A two-level model of interindividual anatomo-functional variability of the brain and its implications for neurosurgery. Cortex, 86, 303–313.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duffy, S. A., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in Reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 27(4), 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(88)90066-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fedorenko, E., Behr, M. K., & Kanwisher, N. (2011). Functional specificity for high-level linguistic processing in the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(39), 16428–16433. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1112937108
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F. (2003). The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 47(2), 164–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0285(03)00005-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., & Patson, N. D. (2007). The ‘good enough’ approach to language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1(1–2), 71–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2007.00007.x
   Google Scholar
• Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 178–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(82)90008-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friederici, A. D. (2012). The cortical language circuit: From auditory perception to sentence comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(5), 262–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.04.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friston, K. J., Holmes, A. P., Worsley, K. J., Poline, J. P., Frith, C. D., & Frackowiak, R. S. (1994). Statistical parametric maps in functional imaging: A general linear approach. Human Brain Mapping, 2(4), 189–210. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.460020402
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert, R. A., & Rodd, J. M. (2022). Dominance norms and data for spoken ambiguous words in British English. Journal of Cognition, 5(1).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grodzinsky, Y. (2000). The neurology of syntax: Language use without Broca’s area. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00002399
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grodzinsky, Y., Pieperhoff, P., & Thompson, C. (2021). Stable brain loci for the processing of complex syntax: A review of the current neuroimaging evidence. Cortex, 142, 252–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2021.06.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagoort, P. (2003). Interplay between syntax and semantics during sentence comprehension: ERP effects of combining syntactic and semantic violations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15(6), 883–899. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892903322370807
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagoort, P. (2005). On Broca, brain, and binding: A new framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(9), 416–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.07.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, J. M., Choi, W., Lowder, M. W., & Ferreira, F. (2016). Language structure in the brain: A fixation-related fMRI study of syntactic surprisal in Reading. Neuroimage, 132, 293–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.02.050
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickok, G., & Poeppel, D. (2004). Dorsal and ventral streams: A framework for understanding aspects of the functional anatomy of language. Cognition, 92(1–2), 67–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoenig, K., & Scheef, L. (2009). Neural correlates of semantic ambiguity processing during context verification. NeuroImage, 45(3), 1009–1019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.12.044
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacob, G., & Felser, C. (2016). Reanalysis and semantic persistence in native and non-native garden-path recovery. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(5), 907–925. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.984231
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JASP Team. (2019). JASP (Version 0.10.2)[Computer software].
   Google Scholar
• Juch, H., Zimine, I., Seghier, M. L., Lazeyras, F., & Fasel, J. H. (2005). Anatomical variability of the lateral frontal lobe surface: implication for intersubject variability in language neuroimaging. Neuroimage, 24(2), 504–514.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaan, E., & Swaab, T. Y. (2003). Repair, revision, and complexity in syntactic analysis: An electrophysiological differentiation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15(1), 98–110. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892903321107855
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kambe, G., Rayner, K., & Duffy, S. A. (2001). Global context effects on processing lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye fixations. Memory & Cognition, 29(2), 363–372. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194931
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, D., & Newman, S. D. (2009). The effect of presentation paradigm on syntactic processing: An event-related fMRI study. Human Brain Mapping, NA–NA. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20845
   Google Scholar
• Magliano, J. P., Baggett, W. B., Johnson, B. K., & Graesser, A. C. (1993). The time course of generating causal antecedent and causal consequence inferences. Discourse Processes, 16(1–2), 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539309544828
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marinkovic, K., Dhond, R. P., Dale, A. M., Glessner, M., Carr, V., & Halgren, E. (2003). Spatiotemporal dynamics of modality-specific and supramodal word processing. Neuron, 38(3), 487–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(03)00197-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, R. A., & Just, M. A. (2007). Lexical ambiguity in sentence comprehension. Brain Research, 1146, 115–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2007.02.076
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masson, M. E. J. (1983). Conceptual processing of text during skimming and rapid sequential Reading. Memory & Cognition, 11(3), 262–274. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196973
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melchert, C. M. C. (2004). In: Woodward, R. D. (Ed.). The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of the World's Ancient Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mesulam, M. (1998). From sensation to cognition. Brain, 121(6), 1013–1052. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/121.6.1013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metzner, P., von der Malsburg, T., Vasishth, S., & Rösler, F. (2017). The importance of Reading naturally: Evidence from combined recordings of eye movements and electric brain potentials. Cognitive Science, 41, 1232–1263. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12384
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nieto-Castañón, A., & Fedorenko, E. (2012). Subject-specific functional localizers increase sensitivity and functional resolution of multi-subject analyses. Neuroimage, 63(3), 1646–1669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.06.065
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nozari, N., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2016). Left ventrolateral prefrontal cortex in processing of words and sentences. In Neurobiology of language (pp. 569–584). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407794-2.00046-8.
   Google Scholar
• Paape, D., & Vasishth, S. (2022). Is reanalysis selective when regressions are consciouslycontrolled? Glossa Psycholinguistics, 1(1), https://doi.org/10.5070/G601139
   Google Scholar
• Pacht, J. M., & Rayner, K. (1993). The processing of homophonic homographs during Reading: Evidence from eye movement studies. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22(2), 251–271. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067833
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickering, M. J., & Traxler, M. J. (1998). Plausibility and recovery from garden paths: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24(4), 940–961. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.24.4.940
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poldrack, R. A. (2006). Can cognitive processes be inferred from neuroimaging data? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(2), 59–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.12.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Postle, B. R. (2006). Working memory as an emergent property of the mind and brain. Neuroscience, 139(1), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2005.06.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price, C. J. (2012). A review and synthesis of the first 20 years of PET and fMRI studies of heard speech, spoken language and reading. NeuroImage, 62(2), 816–847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.04.062
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quillen, I. A., Yen, M., & Wilson, S. M. (2021). Distinct neural correlates of linguistic and non-linguistic demand. Neurobiology of Language, 2(2), 202–225.
   Google Scholar
• Rodd, J. (2018). Lexical ambiguity. Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics. 120–144.
   Google Scholar
• Rodd, J. M. (2020). Settling into semantic space: An ambiguity-focused account of word-meaning access. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15, 411–427. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619885860
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodd, J. M., Davis, M. H., & Johnsrude, I. S. (2005). The neural mechanisms of speech comprehension: FMRI studies of semantic ambiguity. Cerebral Cortex, 15(8), 1261–1269. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhi009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodd, J. M., Johnsrude, I. S., & Davis, M. H. (2010). The role of domain-general frontal systems in language comprehension: Evidence from dual-task interference and semantic ambiguity. Brain and Language, 115(3), 182–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2010.07.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodd, J. M., Johnsrude, I. S., & Davis, M. H. (2012). Dissociating frontotemporal contributions to semantic ambiguity resolution in spoken sentences. Cerebral Cortex, 22(8), 1761–1773. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhr252
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodd, J. M., Longe, O. A., Randall, B., & Tyler, L. K. (2010). The functional organisation of the fronto-temporal language system: Evidence from syntactic and semantic ambiguity. Neuropsychologia, 48(5), 1324–1335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.12.035
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodd, J. M., Vitello, S., Devlin, J. T., & Warren, J. E. (2013, November 6-8). The roles of left and right inferior frontal cortex in the comprehension of ambiguous sentences [Conference abstract]. Society for the Neurobiology of Language 2013 Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA, United States.
   Google Scholar
• RStudio Team (2015). RStudio: Integrated Development for R. Boston, MA: RStudio, Inc. http://www.rstudio.com/
   Google Scholar
• Sanford, A. J., & Sturt, P. (2002). Depth of processing in language comprehension: Not noticing the evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(9), 382–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01958-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saxe, R., Brett, M., & Kanwisher, N. (2006). Divide and conquer: A defense of functional localizers. Neuroimage, 30(4), 1088–1096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.12.062
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schotter, E. R., Tran, R., & Rayner, K. (2014). Don’t believe what You read (only once). Psychological Science, 25(6), 1218–1226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614531148
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuster, S., Hawelka, S., Himmelstoss, N. A., Richlan, F., & Hutzler, F. (2020). The neural correlates of word position and lexical predictability during sentence Reading: Evidence from fixation-related fMRI. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 35(5), 613–624. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1575970
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuster, S., Hawelka, S., Richlan, F., Ludersdorfer, P., & Hutzler, F. (2015). Eyes on words: A fixation-related fMRI study of the left occipito-temporal cortex during self-paced silent Reading of words and pseudowords. Scientific Reports, 5(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep12686
   Google Scholar
• Scott, S. K., Blank, C. C., Rosen, S., & Wise, R. J. (2000). Identification of a pathway for intelligible speech in the left temporal lobe. Brain, 123(12), 2400–2406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sereno, S. C., & Rayner, K. (1993, November). Lexical ambiguity resolution: Evidence from an eye movement priming paradigm. Washington, DC: Paper presented at the 34rd Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society.
   Google Scholar
• Simpson, G. B. (1981). Meaning dominance and semantic context in the processing of lexical ambiguity. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20(1), 120–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90356-X
   Google Scholar
• Slattery, T. J., Sturt, P., Christianson, K., Yoshida, M., & Ferreira, F. (2013). Lingering misinterpretations of garden path sentences arise from competing syntactic representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(2), 104–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spitsyna, G., Warren, J. E., Scott, S. K., Turkheimer, F. E., & Wise, R. J. S. (2006). Converging language streams in the human temporal lobe. Journal of Neuroscience, 26(28), 7328–7336. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0559–06.2006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swinney, D. A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(6), 645–659. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90355-4
   Google Scholar
• Tabor, W., & Hutchins, S. (2004). Evidence for self-organized sentence processing: Digging-in effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(2), 431–450. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.2.431
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tahmasebi, A. M., Davis, M. H., Wild, C. J., Rodd, J. M., Hakyemez, H., Abolmaesumi, P., & Johnsrude, I. S. (2012). Is the link between anatomical structure and function equally strong at all cognitive levels of processing?. Cerebral cortex, 22(7), 1593–1603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson-Schill, S. L., D’Esposito, M., Aguirre, G. K., & Farah, M. J. (1997). Role of left inferior prefrontal cortex in retrieval of semantic knowledge: A reevaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 94(26), 14792–14797. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.26.14792
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Twilley, L. C., & Dixon, P. (2000). Meaning resolution processes for words: A parallel independent model. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7(1), 49–82. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210725
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyler, L. K., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2008). Fronto-temporal brain systems supporting spoken language comprehension. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 363(1493), 1037–1054. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2158
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vitello, S. (2014). Cognitive and Neural Mechanisms Underlying Semantic Ambiguity Resolution. (Doctoral dissertation, University of London).
   Google Scholar
• Vitello, S., & Rodd, J. M. (2015). Resolving semantic ambiguities in sentences: Cognitive processes and brain mechanisms. Language and Linguistics Compass, 9(10), 391–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12160
   Google Scholar
• Vitello, S., Warren, J. E., Devlin, J. T., & Rodd, J. M. (2014). Roles of frontal and temporal regions in reinterpreting semantically ambiguous sentences. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00530
   Google Scholar
• Warren, J. E. (2013). The functional organisation of neural systems supporting human vocal communication. (Doctoral dissertation, University of London).
   Google Scholar
• Waters, G. S., & Caplan, D. (1996). The capacity theory of sentence comprehension: Critique of just and carpenter (1992). Psychological Review, 103(4), 761–772. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.4.761
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wlotko, E. W., & Federmeier, K. D. (2015). Time for prediction? The effect of presentation rate on predictive sentence comprehension during word-by-word Reading. Cortex, 68, 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2015.03.014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright, P., Randall, B., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Tyler, L. K. (2011). Dissociating linguistic and task-related activity in the left inferior frontal gyrus. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(2), 404–413. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2010.21450
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zempleni, M.-Z., Renken, R., Hoeks, J. C. J., Hoogduin, J. M., & Stowe, L. A. (2007). Semantic ambiguity processing in sentence context: Evidence from event-related fMRI. NeuroImage, 34(3), 1270–1279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.09.048
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu, Z., Hagoort, P., Zhang, J. X., Feng, G., Chen, H.-C., Bastiaansen, M., & Wang, S. (2012). The anterior left inferior frontal gyrus contributes to semantic unification. NeuroImage, 60(4), 2230–2237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.02.036
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar