Time for prediction? The effect of presentation rate on predictive sentence comprehension during word-by-word reading

Abstract

Predictive processing is a core component of normal language comprehension, but the brain may not engage in prediction to the same extent in all circumstances. This study investigates the effects of timing on anticipatory comprehension mechanisms. Event-related brain potentials (ERPs) were recorded while participants read two-sentence mini-scenarios previously shown to elicit prediction-related effects for implausible items that are categorically related to expected items (‘They wanted to make the hotel look more like a tropical resort. So along the driveway they planted rows of PALMS/PINES/TULIPS.’). The first sentence of every pair was presented in its entirety and was self-paced. The second sentence was presented word-by-word with a fixed stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) of either 500 ms or 250 ms that was manipulated in a within-subjects blocked design. Amplitudes of the N400 ERP component are taken as a neural index of demands on semantic processing. At 500 ms SOA, implausible words related to predictable words elicited reduced N400 amplitudes compared to unrelated words (PINES vs. TULIPS), replicating past studies. At 250 ms SOA this prediction-related semantic facilitation was diminished. Thus, timing is a factor in determining the extent to which anticipatory mechanisms are engaged. However, we found evidence that prediction can sometimes be engaged even under speeded presentation rates. Participants who first read sentences in the 250 ms SOA block showed no effect of semantic similarity for this SOA, although these same participants showed the effect in the second block with 500 ms SOA. However, participants who first read sentences in the 500 ms SOA block continued to show the N400 semantic similarity effect in the 250 ms SOA block. These findings add to results showing that the brain flexibly allocates resources to most effectively achieve comprehension goals given the current processing environment.

Integrative and predictive processes in text reading: the N400 across a sentence boundary

“…These predictions lead to a facilitation of word processing when the target was encountered. Wlotko and Federmeier (2015) found similar results using sentence pairs and different blocks that either increased or decreased the likelihood of individuals making predictions. Thus, similar to differences in our Experiments 1 and 2, the types of processes used in reading depend on task environment and stimuli characteristics.…”

“…The different result patterns are a product of differences in reading mode and experiences within the experimental task (Lau et al, 2013;Wlotko & Federmeier, 2015). Experiment 1 required individuals to make decisions on critical words, therefore those words elicited an action and were not integrated into the situation model.…”

Wait a second! delayed impact of argument roles on on-line verb prediction

“…Therefore, it is possible that comprehenders do use argument role information to predict an upcoming verb, but they simply cannot do so quickly enough when the verb appears immediately following the arguments. This idea is consistent with previous findings that timing manipulations can modulate predictability effects (e.g., Dambacher et al, 2012;Ito, Corley, Pickering, Martin, & Nieuwland, 2016;Kutas, 1993;Wlotko & Federmeier, 2015). Under this view, the N400's sensitivity to argument role reversals should depend on (i) the predictability of the verb and (ii) the amount of time available for comprehenders to incorporate information about the arguments' roles in their verb predictions.…”

“…Instead, they provide empirical support for Laszlo and Federmeier's (2009) proposal that "quantitative shifts in the timing of processing can potentially lead to qualitative differences in what particular facets of semantics come to be linked up with a given input" (p.32) and highlight the importance of timing considerations in the study of prediction (cf. Dambacher et al, 2012;Wlotko & Federmeier, 2015). Note, however, that the present proposal is distinct from 'good-enough' models of language comprehension (e.g., Christianson, Hollingworth, Halliwell, & Ferreira, 2001;Ferreira, Bailey, & Ferraro, 2002), or any model which posits that detailed syntactic information may be ignored during comprehension (e.g., Townsend & Bever, 2001).…”

Looking for a Location: Dissociated Effects of Event-Related Plausibility and Verb–Argument Information on Predictive Processing in Aphasia

“…Older adults, many of whom have reduced processing speed (Salthouse, 1996) or working-memory capacity (Salthouse & Babcock, 1991), may have more difficulty than younger adults do in combining those cues rapidly to generate predictions. Consistent with that possibility, younger adults also predict less when a faster presentation rate reduces the time available to generate predictions (Wlotko & Federmeier, 2015). However, recent work has suggested that the type of contextual constraint is also important for whether ON adults exhibit reduced prediction compared with YN adults: The two groups exhibit much smaller differences for strong-constraint contexts (Wlotko et al, 2012).…”