ArticleExperimental brain research2020
Head errors of syntactic dependency increase neuromagnetic mismatch intensities.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Can the Mismatch Negativity Really Be Elicited by Abstract Linguistic Contrasts?Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Differentiation of task complexity in long-term memory retrieval using multifractal detrended fluctuation analysis of fNIRS recordings.Experimental brain research · 2022Article
- Local syntactic violations evoke fast mismatch-related neural activity detected by optical neuroimaging.Experimental brain research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Mismatch-related brain activation in healthy individuals is an important area of neural investigation. Previously, we evaluated sentence-level syntactic dependencies, composed of a head and a dependent between two syntactically related words in head-initial English structures. We demonstrated that prominent mismatch effects were induced by within-category dependent errors when semantic interpretation was preserved. However, the following issues were not addressed: (1) whether head errors of syntactic dependency in head-final structures would elicit large mismatch field (MMF) intensities, and (2) whether an MMF effect of syntactic errors would be seen in the left superior temporal cortex alone. In this study, auditory MMFs were obtained by magnetocephalography (MEG) from healthy Japanese adults (n = 8) who were subjected to a passive auditory oddball paradigm with syntactically legal or illegal utterances and single words in Japanese. The results demonstrate that the source waveforms had significantly higher MMF cortical activation in response to the head error, which involved altered polarity of the predicate. This resulted in a syntactically incorrect and semantically incomprehensible expression, when compared to the syntactically correct expression and the non-structural lexical item. This mismatch effect, with a peak latency of 164 ms, was confined to the anterior region of the left superior temporal cortex. The current results clearly indicate that the representation of syntactic dependency is stored in long-term memory and tends to be activated in automatic auditory processing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.