ArticleBrain and language2020
Dynamic EEG analysis during language comprehension reveals interactive cascades between perceptual processing and sentential expectations.
Article in Brain and language, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Longitudinal Changes in the Structure of Speech Categorization Across School Age Years: Children Become More Gradient and More Consistent.Developmental science · 2026Article
- Decoupling speech processing from time.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2026Review
- From real-time measures to real world differences: New [and old] statistical approaches to individual differences in real-time language processing.Brain research · 2025Review
- Enhancing mobile EEG: Software development and performance insights of the DreamMachine.HardwareX · 2025Article
- Timecourse of bottom-up and top-down language processing during a picture-based semantic priming task.Language, cognition and neuroscience · 2025Article
- Functional benefits of continuous vs. categorical listening strategies on the neural encoding and perception of noise-degraded speech.Brain research · 2024Article
- Linguistic diversity shapes flexible speech perception in school age children.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Individual differences in the perception of phonetic category structure predict speech-in-noise performance.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2024Article
- Individual differences in the use of top-down versus bottom-up cues to resolve phonetic ambiguity.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024Article
- A Bayesian hierarchical model for the analysis of visual analogue scaling tasks.Statistical methods in medical research · 2024Article
- Acoustic and language-specific sources for phonemic abstraction from speech.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Immediate neural impact and incomplete compensation after semantic hub disconnection.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Understanding language processing in variable populations on their own terms: Towards a functionalist psycholinguistics of individual differences, development, and disorders.Applied psycholinguistics · 2023Article
- I'm not sure that curve means what you think it means: Toward a [more] realistic understanding of the role of eye-movement generation in the Visual World Paradigm.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2023Review
- Don't force it! Gradient speech categorization calls for continuous categorization tasks.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2022Review
- The myth of categorical perception.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2022Review
- Article
- Moving away from deficiency models: Gradiency in bilingual speech categorization.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- The pictures who shall not be named: Empirical support for benefits of preview in the Visual World Paradigm.Journal of memory and language · 2021Article
- Idiosyncratic use of bottom-up and top-down information leads to differences in speech perception flexibility: Converging evidence from ERPs and eye-tracking.Brain and language · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding spoken language requires analysis of the rapidly unfolding speech signal at multiple levels: acoustic, phonological, and semantic. However, there is not yet a comprehensive picture of how these levels relate. We recorded electroencephalography (EEG) while listeners (N = 31) heard sentences in which we manipulated acoustic ambiguity (e.g., a bees/peas continuum) and sentential expectations (e.g., Honey is made by bees). EEG was analyzed with a mixed effects model over time to quantify how language processing cascades proceed on a millisecond-by-millisecond basis. Our results indicate: (1) perceptual processing and memory for fine-grained acoustics is preserved in brain activity for up to 900 msec; (2) contextual analysis begins early and is graded with respect to the acoustic signal; and (3) top-down predictions influence perceptual processing in some cases, however, these predictions are available simultaneously with the veridical signal. These mechanistic insights provide a basis for a better understanding of the cortical language network.
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.