2020
DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_01493
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Neural Time Course of Semantic Ambiguity Resolution in Speech Comprehension

Abstract: Semantically ambiguous words challenge speech comprehension, particularly when listeners must select a less frequent (subordinate) meaning at disambiguation. Using combined magnetoencephalography (MEG) and EEG, we measured neural responses associated with distinct cognitive operations during semantic ambiguity resolution in spoken sentences: (i) initial activation and selection of meanings in response to an ambiguous word and (ii) sentence reinterpretation in response to subsequent disambiguation to a subordin… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
60
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(65 citation statements)
references
References 92 publications
(127 reference statements)
5
60
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Word-meaning priming seems to operate on the output of good-enough processing: for lower frequency meanings of ambiguous words, a subsequent context may not be enough to easily repair an initial misinterpretation, whereas for prior disambiguation sentences, the ambiguity is more easily resolved and priming occurs more reliably. This is supported by brain imaging studies showing differences in fMRI bold responses and event-related potentials for subsequent disambiguation sentences that resolve to a subordinate meaning, which presumably reflects the detection of misinterpretation and/or effortful repair process (Macgregor et al, 2020;Rodd et al, 2012). More generally, the effect of the probe task on sentence processing underscores the importance of conceptual replications for investigating the phenomenon of interest separate from any potential task-specific effects.…”
Section: Effects Of Reinterpretation and Listening Task On Lexical-semantic Retuningmentioning
confidence: 80%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Word-meaning priming seems to operate on the output of good-enough processing: for lower frequency meanings of ambiguous words, a subsequent context may not be enough to easily repair an initial misinterpretation, whereas for prior disambiguation sentences, the ambiguity is more easily resolved and priming occurs more reliably. This is supported by brain imaging studies showing differences in fMRI bold responses and event-related potentials for subsequent disambiguation sentences that resolve to a subordinate meaning, which presumably reflects the detection of misinterpretation and/or effortful repair process (Macgregor et al, 2020;Rodd et al, 2012). More generally, the effect of the probe task on sentence processing underscores the importance of conceptual replications for investigating the phenomenon of interest separate from any potential task-specific effects.…”
Section: Effects Of Reinterpretation and Listening Task On Lexical-semantic Retuningmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…In most cases, these constraints will support the selection of the correct meaning. However, occasionally the listener/reader will select the wrong meaning of a word and correct comprehension will depend on subsequently detecting that error and engaging in a cognitively demanding reinterpretation process (Macgregor et al, 2020;Rodd, Johnsrude, & Davis, 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The increased effort likely reflects the cost of overcoming the initial automatic predictions generated from the misperceived words ( Shenhav et al., 2017 ). There are entire paradigms of research based on the concept of building and then intentionally violating a listener’s expectations to demonstrate the influence of language on predictive and restorative processing ( Kutas & Hillyard, 1984 ), including studies that track the resolution of sentence structure in real time ( MacGregor et al., 2019 ). The study of speech perception by individuals with hearing impairment offers a special opportunity to observe the consequences of these predictions and violations while still using typical sentences that have the desirable quality of maintaining the listener’s normal expectation of coherent sensible stimuli.…”
Section: Experiments 2: Effort Patterns Associated With Various Types Of Correct and Incorrect Responsesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This concept hinges on the notion that listeners expect a sentence to make sense, and will employ extra effort to re-parse the sentence when it is not sensible. There are entire paradigms of research based on the concept of building and then intentionally violating a listener's expectations in order to demonstrate the influence of language on predictive and restorative processing (Kutas & Hillyard 1986), including studies that track the resolution of sentence structure in real time (MacGregor et al 2019). The study of speech perception by individuals with hearing impairment offers a special opportunity to observe the consequences of these predictions and violations while still using typical sentences which have the desirable quality of maintaining the listener's normal disposition of expecting sensible stimuli.…”
Section: Classifying Types Of Responses In Speech Intelligibility Testsmentioning
confidence: 99%