Prediction during language comprehension: benefits, costs, and ERP components.

By Cyma K Van Petten, B. Luka. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 2012

704 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/582f8bf81e96ddeb89396e3b3469ae9d45fba618

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

Citations in the corpus

What do we mean by prediction in language comprehension? (2015, methodology): “(see Jackendoff, 2002; Van Petten & Luka, 2012 for discussion).”
Communicative efficiency in language production: Optional case-marking in Japanese (2015, neutral): “…& Pylkkänen, 2013; Kutas & Hillyard, 1984; Van Berkum, Brown, Zwitserlood, Kooijman, & Hagoort, 2005; for recent reviews, see Kuperberg, 2013; Van Petten & Luka, 2012), eye-movements during reading (Boston, Hale, Kliegl, Patil, & Vasishth, 2008; Demberg & Keller, 2008; Staub & Clifton, 2006),…”
Investigating scalar implicatures in a truth-value judgement task: evidence from event-related brain potentials (2016, methodology): “…contrast, in studies related to episodic memory a late positivity effect observed approximately 400–800 ms post-stimulus onset has been described as so-called old/new effect – stimuli recognized as old tend to elicit more positive ERPs than new items correctly rejected (Van Petten and Luka, 2012).”
How language production shapes language form and comprehension (2012, background): “Use of statistical dependencies in the forward direction does not necessarily entail exactly predicting upcoming words but rather generating general expectations about grammatical category, gender, and other properties that greatly narrow the scope of possibilities (Van Petten and Luka, 2012).”
Bilinguals reading in their second language do not predict upcoming words as native readers do (2013, background): “If L1 comprehenders actively predict upcoming words while reading, the presentation of an unexpected final noun should induce a re-processing cost reflected by an Anterior Positivity (DeLong et al., 2011, 2012; Federmeier et al., 2007; Otten & Van Berkum, 2008; Van Petten & Luka, 2012).”