Rapid prediction of verbs based on pronoun interpretation is modulated by individual differences in pronoun processing

References

• Almor, A., Nair, V. A., Boiteau, T. W., & Vendemia, J. M. (2017). The N400 in processing repeated name and pronoun anaphors in sentences and discourse. Brain and Language, 173, 52–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2017.06.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arai, M., & Keller, F. (2013). The use of verb-specific information for prediction in sentence processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(4), 525–560. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2012.658072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnold, J. E. (2010). How speakers refer: The role of accessibility. Language and Linguistics Compass, 4(4), 187–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2010.00193.x
   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
• 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
• Boyce, V., Futrell, R., & Levy, R. P. (2020). Maze made easy: Better and easier measurement of incremental processing difficulty. Journal of Memory and Language, 111, 104082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2019.104082
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brehm, L., & Alday, P. M. (2022). Contrast coding choices in a decade of mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 125, 104334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2022.104334
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canal, P., Garnham, A., & Oakhill, J. (2015). Beyond gender stereotypes in language comprehension: Self sex-role descriptions affect the brain's potentials associated with agreement information-processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1953. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01953
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chow, W.-Y., & Chen, D. (2020). Predicting (in)correctly: Listeners rapidly use unexpected information to revise their predictions. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 35(9), 1149–1161. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2020.1733627
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chow, W.-Y., Lau, E., Wang, S., & Phillips, C. (2018). Wait a second! Delayed impact of argument roles on on-line verb prediction. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 33(7), 803–828. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2018.1427878
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chow, W.-Y., Momma, S., Smith, C., Lau, E., & Phillips, C. (2016). Prediction as memory retrieval: Timing and mechanisms. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(5), 617–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2016.1160135
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cozijn, R., Commandeur, E., Vonk, W., & Noordman, L. G. M. (2011). The time course of the use of implicit causality information in the processing of pronouns. Journal of Memory and Language, 64(4), 381–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delogu, F., Brouwer, H., & Crocker, M. W. (2019). Event-related potentials index lexical retrieval (N400) and integration (P600) during language comprehension. Brain and Cognition, 135, 103569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2019.05.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeLong, K. A., Quante, L., & Kutas, M. (2014). Predictability, plausibility, and two late ERP positivities during written sentence comprehension. Neuropsychologia, 61, 150–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.06.016
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farmer, T. A., Christiansen, M. H., & Kemtes, K. A.. (2005). Sentence processing in context: The impact of experience on individual differences. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 27. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4fx748rd
   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, 41(4), 469–495. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1999.2660
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, J., & Weisberg, S. (2019). An R companion to applied regression (3rd ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Frade, S., Pinheiro, A. P., Santi, A., & Raposo, A. (2022). Is second best good enough? An EEG study on the effects of word expectancy in sentence comprehension. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 37(2), 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2021.1955140
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrod, S., Freudenthal, D., & Boyle, E. (1994). The role of different types of anaphor in the on-line resolution of sentences in a discourse. Journal of Memory and Language, 33(1), 39–68. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1994.1003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, E. (2006). The interaction of top–down and bottom–up statistics in the resolution of syntactic category ambiguity. Journal of Memory and Language, 54(3), 363–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, J. J., McCourt, M., Lau, E., & Williams, A. (2020). Processing adjunct control: Evidence on the use of structural information and prediction in reference resolution. Glossa, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1133
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grey, S. (2022). Variability in native and nonnative language: An ERP study of semantic and grammar processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 45(1), 137–166. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263122000055
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grey, S., Tanner, D., & van Hell, J. G. (2017). How right is left? Handedness modulates neural responses during morphosyntactic processing. Brain Research, 1669, 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2017.05.024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grüter, T., Takeda, A., Rohde, H., & Schafer, A. J. (2018). Intersentential coreference expectations reflect mental models of events. Cognition, 177, 172–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.04.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gulordava, K., Bojanowski, P., Grave, E., Linzen, T., & Baroni, M. (2018). Colorless green recurrent networks dream hierarchically. Proceedings of NAACL. Association for Computational Linguistics.
   Google Scholar
• Haeuser, K. I., & Kray, J. (2022). How odd: Diverging effects of predictability and plausibility violations on sentence reading and word memory. Applied Psycholinguistics, 43(5), 1193–1220. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716422000364
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagoort, P., Baggio, G., & Willems, R. M. (2009). Semantic unification. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences (Vol. 4, pp. 819–836). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hagoort, P., Hald, L., Bastiaansen, M., & Petersson, K. M. (2004). Integration of word meaning and world knowledge in language comprehension. Science, 304(5669), 438–441. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1095455.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hersch, J., & Andrews, S. (2012). Lexical quality and reading skill: Bottom-up and top-down contributions to sentence processing. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16(3), 240–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2011.564244
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huettig, F., & Janse, E. (2015). Individual differences in working memory and processing speed predict anticipatory spoken language processing in the visual world. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(1), 80–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1047459
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Husband, E. M. (2022). Prediction in the maze: Evidence for probabilistic pre-activation from the English a/an contrast. Glossa Psycholinguistics, 1(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.5070/G601153
   Google Scholar
• Jasper, H. H. (1958). The ten-twenty electrode system of the international federation. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 10(2), 370–375. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(58)90053-1
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, E., & Arnold, J. E. (2021). Individual differences in print exposure predict use of implicit causality in pronoun comprehension and referential prediction. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 672109. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.672109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaan, E. (2014). Predictive sentence processing in L2 and L1. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 4(2), 257–282. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.4.2.05kaa
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaan, E., Harris, A., Gibson, E., & Holcomb, P. (2000). The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(2), 159–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/016909600386084
   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
• Kassambara, A., & Mundt, F. (2020). Factoextra. R package.
   Google Scholar
• Kazanina, N., Lau, E. F., Lieberman, M., Yoshida, M., & Phillips, C. (2007). The effect of syntactic constraints on the processing of backwards anaphora. Journal of Memory and Language, 56(3), 384–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.09.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kehler, A., Kertz, L., Rohde, H., & Elman, J. L. (2008). Coherence and coreference revisited. Journal of Semantics, 25(1), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffm018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kehler, A., & Rohde, H. (2013). A probabilistic reconciliation of coherence-driven and centering-driven theories of pronoun interpretation. Theoretical Linguistics, 39(1-2), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2013-0001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, A. E., McKnight, S., & Miyake, A. (2023). How variable are the classic ERP effects during sentence processing? A systematic resampling analysis of the N400 and P600 effects. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/3k4sp.
   Google Scholar
• Kolk, H., & Chwilla, D. (2007). Late positivities in unusual situations. Brain and Language, 100(3), 257–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2006.07.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koornneef, A. W., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2006). On the use of verb-based implicit causality in sentence comprehension: Evidence from self-paced reading and eye tracking. Journal of Memory and Language, 54(4), 445–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kush, D., & Dillon, B. (2021). Principle B constrains the processing of cataphora: Evidence for syntactic and discourse predictions. Journal of Memory and Language, 120, 104254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2021.104254
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2000). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(12), 463–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01560-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®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(1), 621–647. https://doi.org/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(5947), 161–163. https://doi.org/10.1038/307161a0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lago, S., Namyst, A., Jäger, L. A., & Lau, E. (2019). Antecedent access mechanisms in pronoun processing: Evidence from the N400. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 34(5), 641–661. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1566561
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langlois, V. J., & Arnold, J. E. (2020). Print exposure explains individual differences in using syntactic but not semantic cues for pronoun comprehension. Cognition, 197, 104155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104155
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau, E. F., Namyst, A., Fogel, A., & Delgado, T. (2016). A direct comparison of N400 effects of predictability and incongruity in adjective-noun combination. Collabra, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.40
   PubMedGoogle 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. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2532
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenth, R. V. (2021). Emmeans. R package.
   Google Scholar
• Liao, C.-H., & Lau, E. (2020). Enough time to get results? An ERP investigation of prediction with complex events. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 35(9), 1162–1182. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2020.1733626
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liao, C.-H., Lau, E., & Chow, W.-Y. (2022). Towards a processing model for argument-verb computations in online sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 126, 104350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2022.104350
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mani, N., & Huettig, F. (2012). Prediction during language processing is a piece of cake – but only for skilled producers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(4), 843–847. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029284
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mantegna, F., Hintz, F., Ostarek, M., Alday, P. M., & Huettig, F. (2019). Distinguishing integration and prediction accounts of ERP N400 modulations in language processing through experimental design. Neuropsychologia, 134, 107199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2019.107199
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nieuwland, M. S., Barr, D. J., Bartolozzi, F., Busch-Moreno, S., Darley, E., Donaldson, D. I., Ferguson, H. J., Fu, X., Heyselaar, E., Huettig, F., Husband, E. M., Ito, A., Kazanina, N., Kogan, V., Kohút, Z., Kulakova, E., Mézière, D., Politzer-Ahles, S., Rousselet, G., …Wolfsthurn, S. V. G. Z. (2019). Dissociable effects of prediction and integration during language comprehension: Evidence from a large-scale study using brain potentials. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 375, 20180522. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2018.0522
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nieuwland, M. S., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2006). Individual differences and contextual bias in pronoun resolution: Evidence from ERPs. Brain Research, 1118(1), 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.08.022
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nieuwland, M. S., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2008). The interplay between semantic and referential aspects of anaphoric noun phrase resolution: Evidence from ERPs. Brain and Language, 106(2), 119–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2008.05.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1992). Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 31(6), 785–806. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(92)90039-Z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osterhout, L., & Mobley, L. A. (1995). Event-related brain potentials elicited by failure to agree. Journal of Memory and Language, 34(6), 739–773. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1995.1033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perception Research Systems (2007). Paradigm stimulus presentation. Computer Software.
   Google Scholar
• Qiu, L., Swaab, T. Y., Chen, H.-C., & Wang, S. (2012). The role of gender information in pronoun resolution: Evidence from Chinese. PloS One, 7(5), e36156. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036156
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 4.2.1), Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Reuter, T., Dalawella, K., & Lew-Williams, C. (2020). Adults and children predict in complex and variable referential contexts. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 36(4), 474–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2020.1839665
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rich, S., & Harris, J. A. (2021). Unexpected guests. Proceedings of the annual meeting of the cognitive science society (Vol. 43, pp. 2246–2252).
   Google Scholar
• Rohde, H., & Kehler, A. (2013). Grammatical and information-structural influences on pronoun production. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(8), 912–927. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2013.854918
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RStudio Team (2021). RStudio: Integrated development environment for R (Version 2022.12.0). Boston, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Schad, D. J., Vasishth, S., Hohenstein, S., & Kliegl, R. (2020). How to capitalize on a priori contrasts in linear (mixed) models: A tutorial. Journal of Memory and Language, 110, 104038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2019.104038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, C. M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2018). What does “it” mean, anyway? Examining the time course of semantic activation in reference resolution. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 34(1), 115–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2018.1513540
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, A. J., Pickering, M. J., & Sanford, A. J. (2000). The time course of the influence of implicit causality information: Focusing versus integration accounts. Journal of Memory and Language, 42(3), 423–443. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1999.2691
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone, K., Nicenboim, B., Vasishth, S., & Rösler, F. (2023). Understanding the effects of constraint and predictability in ERP. Neurobiology of Language, 4(2), 221–256. https://doi.org/10.1162/nol_a_00094
   Google Scholar
• Sturt, P. (2013). Syntactic constraints on referential processing. In R. P. G. van Gompel (Ed.), Sentence processing, chapter 6 (pp. 136–159). Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sun, Y. (2022). Phonological prediction in spoken language processing. PhD thesis. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
   Google Scholar
• Szewczyk, J. M., & Schriefers, H. (2017). The N400 as an index of lexical preactivation and its implications for prediction in language comprehension. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 33(6), 665–686. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2017.1401101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szewczyk, J. M., & Wodniecka, Z. (2020). The mechanisms of prediction updating that impact the processing of upcoming word: An event-related potential study on sentence comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46(9), 1714–1734. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000835
   Google Scholar
• Tanner, D., & Van Hell, J. G. (2014). ERPs reveal individual differences in morphosyntactic processing. Neuropsychologia, 56, 289–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.02.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thornhill, D. E., & Van Petten, C. (2012). Lexical versus conceptual anticipation during sentence processing: Frontal positivity and N400 ERP components. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 83(3), 382–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2011.12.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2009). The neuropragmatics of “simple” utterance comprehension. In U. Sauerland & K. Yatsushiro (Eds.), Semantics and pragmatics (pp. 276–316). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Van Berkum, J. J. A., Holleman, B., Nieuwland, M., Otten, M., & Murre, J. (2009). Right or wrong? The brain's fast response to morally objectionable statements. Psychological Science, 20(9), 1092–1099. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02411.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Berkum, J. J. A., Koornneef, A. W., Otten, M., & Nieuwland, M. S. (2007). Establishing reference in language comprehension: An electrophysiological perspective. Brain Research, 1146, 158–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.06.091
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar