INVESTIGADORES
TABULLO Angel Javier
congresos y reuniones científicas
Título:
A P600 component in an artificial grammar without semantics: an
Autor/es:
TABULLO, ANGEL; SEVILLA, YAMILA; PASQUALETTI, GUILLERMO; YORIO, ALBERTO; ZANUTTO, SILVANO; WAINSELBOIM, ALEJANDRO
Lugar:
Kobe
Reunión:
Congreso; 29th International Congress of Clinical Neurophysiology; 2010
Institución organizadora:
International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology
Resumen:
The P600 component is a late positivity found after syntactic anomalies
in sentences (Osterhout and Holcomb 1992) So far, it has not been
addressed if the P600 is found after violations of an artificial grammar
without semantic content, based solely on statistic information. The
aims of the present study were: (1) To examine the presence of P600
after structural violations of a semantic-free artificial grammar based on
statistical information; (2) to examine if the type of structural violation
affects the P600 component.
Methods: 21 right-handed Spanish native speakers participated in
the study. A semantic-free artificial grammar was used. The lexicon
consisted of 17 bisillabic, phonotactically correct pseudowords. The
grammar admitted two possible sentence structures. Subjects were
trained by mere exposure with a set of 90 correct sentences, and then
discriminated between grammatical and ungrammatical new sentences in
the test stage. Two types of ungrammatical sentences were presented:
(a) conjunction violation (presenting a connector from structure 1 in a
sentence with structure 2), (b) category violation (presenting an item
from an incorrect category at the end of the sentence). EEG activity was
recorded during test stage.
21 right-handed Spanish native speakers participated in
the study. A semantic-free artificial grammar was used. The lexicon
consisted of 17 bisillabic, phonotactically correct pseudowords. The
grammar admitted two possible sentence structures. Subjects were
trained by mere exposure with a set of 90 correct sentences, and then
discriminated between grammatical and ungrammatical new sentences in
the test stage. Two types of ungrammatical sentences were presented:
(a) conjunction violation (presenting a connector from structure 1 in a
sentence with structure 2), (b) category violation (presenting an item
from an incorrect category at the end of the sentence). EEG activity was
recorded during test stage.
Results: A late centro-parietal positivity was observed within 600
900 ms after grammar violations. The difference between grammatical
and ungrammatical sentences was significant (F(1,20) = 7.015; p = 0.016).
A further ANOVA, discriminating between violation types, showed a
region × laterality × sentence type effect (F(16,304) = 2.647; p = 0.039).
Category violations elicited greater positivities than grammatical
sentences. No differences were found between conjunction violations.
A late centro-parietal positivity was observed within 600
900 ms after grammar violations. The difference between grammatical
and ungrammatical sentences was significant (F(1,20) = 7.015; p = 0.016).
A further ANOVA, discriminating between violation types, showed a
region × laterality × sentence type effect (F(16,304) = 2.647; p = 0.039).
Category violations elicited greater positivities than grammatical
sentences. No differences were found between conjunction violations.
× laterality × sentence type effect (F(16,304) = 2.647; p = 0.039).
Category violations elicited greater positivities than grammatical
sentences. No differences were found between conjunction violations.
Discussion: Results suggests that the P600 can be elicited by expectancy
violations based on distributional properties of input. The effect was
more clearly observed after category violations. It is possible that this
type of violation was more salient, as it was located at the end of the
sentence.
Results suggests that the P600 can be elicited by expectancy
violations based on distributional properties of input. The effect was
more clearly observed after category violations. It is possible that this
type of violation was more salient, as it was located at the end of the
sentence.