ArticleNeurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.)2023
Understanding the Effects of Constraint and Predictability in ERP.
Article in Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing Brain Responses to Moral and Semantic Violations.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Cognitive processing of semantic mismatch in Chinese reading: the moderating effect of contextual constraint.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Individual differences in subcomponents of the N400: Comprehension ability predicts contextual support effects while spelling ability predicts orthographic anomaly effects.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2025Article
- Emotional valence, cloze probability, and entropy: Completion norms for 403 French sentences.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Aging and word predictability during reading: Evidence from eye movements and fixation-related potentials.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- Cochlear implantation in adults with acquired single-sided deafness improves cortical processing and comprehension of speech presented to the non-implanted ears: a longitudinal EEG study.Brain communications · 2025Article
- Unexpected words that become your best memories: How sentential constraint and word expectedness affect memory retrieval.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Graded and ungraded expectation patterns: Prediction dynamics during active comprehension.Psychophysiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intuitively, strongly constraining contexts should lead to stronger probabilistic representations of sentences in memory. Encountering unexpected words could therefore be expected to trigger costlier shifts in these representations than expected words. However, psycholinguistic measures commonly used to study probabilistic processing, such as the N400 event-related potential (ERP) component, are sensitive to word predictability but not to contextual constraint. Some research suggests that constraint-related processing cost may be measurable via an ERP positivity following the N400, known as the anterior post-N400 positivity (PNP). The PNP is argued to reflect update of a sentence representation and to be distinct from the posterior P600, which reflects conflict detection and reanalysis. However, constraint-related PNP findings are inconsistent. We sought to conceptually replicate Federmeier et al. (2007) and Kuperberg et al. (2020), who observed that the PNP, but not the N400 or the P600, was affected by constraint at unexpected but plausible words. Using a pre-registered design and statistical approach maximising power, we demonstrated a dissociated effect of predictability and constraint: strong evidence for predictability but not constraint in the N400 window, and strong evidence for constraint but not predictability in the later window. However, the constraint effect was consistent with a P600 and not a PNP, suggesting increased conflict between a strong representation and unexpected input rather than greater update of the representation. We conclude that either a simple strong/weak constraint design is not always sufficient to elicit the PNP, or that previous PNP constraint findings could be an artifact of smaller sample size.
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.