Monthly
160 pp. per issue
8 1/2 x 11, illustrated
Founded: 1989
ISSN 0898-929X
E-ISSN 1530-8898
2008 ISI Impact Factor: 4.867
|
May 2006, Vol. 18, No. 5, Pages 818-832
Posted Online May 18, 2006.
(doi:10.1162/jocn.2006.18.5.818)
© 2006 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
[Q:] When Would You Prefer a SOSSAGE to a SAUSAGE? [A:] At about 100 msec. ERP Correlates of Orthographic Typicality and Lexicality in Written Word Recognition O. Hauk1, K Patterson1, A. Woollams1, L. Watling1, F. Pulvermüller1, and T. T. Rogers1,21MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, Cambridge, UK 2University of Wisconsin, Madison
Abstract Using a speeded lexical decision task, event-related potentials (ERPs), and minimum norm current source estimates, we investigated early spatiotemporal aspects of cortical activation elicited by words and pseudowords that varied in their orthographic typicality, that is, in the frequency of their component letter pairs (bigrams) and triplets (trigrams). At around 100 msec after stimulus onset, the ERP pattern revealed a significant typicality effect, where words and pseudowords with atypical orthography (e.g., yacht, cacht) elicited stronger brain activation than items characterized by typical spelling patterns (cart, yart). At ~200 msec, the ERP pattern revealed a significant lexicality effect, with pseudowords eliciting stronger brain activity than words. The two main factors interacted significantly at around 160 msec, where words showed a typicality effect but pseudowords did not. The principal cortical sources of the effects of both typicality and lexicality were localized in the inferior temporal cortex. Around 160 msec, atypical words elicited the stronger source currents in the left anterior inferior temporal cortex, whereas the left perisylvian cortex was the site of greater activation to typical words. Our data support distinct but interactive processing stages in word recognition, with surface features of the stimulus being processed before the word as a meaningful lexical entry. The interaction of typicality and lexicality can be explained by integration of information from the early form-based system and lexicosemantic processes. Cited byUrs Maurer, Jason D. Zevin, Bruce D. McCandliss. (2008) Left-lateralized N170 Effects of Visual Expertise in Reading: Evidence from Japanese Syllabic and Logographic Scripts. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 20:10, 1878-1891 Online publication date: 1-Oct-2008. Abstract
| PDF (392 KB)
| PDF Plus (351 KB) Marina Mariol, Corentin Jacques, Marie-Anne Schelstraete, Bruno Rossion. (2008) The Speed of Orthographic Processing during Lexical Decision: Electrophysiological Evidence for Independent Coding of Letter Identity and Letter Position in Visual Word Recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 20:7, 1283-1299 Online publication date: 1-Jul-2008. Abstract
| PDF (404 KB)
| PDF Plus (266 KB) O. Hauk, K. Patterson, A. Woollams, E. Cooper-Pye, F. Pulvermüller, T. T. Rogers. (2007) How the Camel Lost Its Hump: The Impact of Object Typicality on Event-related Potential Signals in Object Decision. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 19:8, 1338-1353 Online publication date: 1-Aug-2007. Abstract
| PDF (1850 KB)
| PDF Plus (1834 KB)
|