The Experts below are selected from a list of 1899 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Martin J. Pickering - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
lexically mediated Syntactic Priming effects in comprehension sources of facilitation
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2019Co-Authors: Kristen M. Tooley, Martin J. Pickering, Matthew J. TraxlerAbstract:The nature of the facilitation occurring when sentences share a verb and Syntactic structure (i.e., lexically-mediated Syntactic Priming) has not been adequately addressed in comprehension. In four eye-tracking experiments, we investigated the degree to which lexical, Syntactic, thematic, and verb form repetition contribute to facilitated target sentence processing. Lexically-mediated Syntactic Priming was observed when primes and targets shared a verb and abstract Syntactic structure, regardless of the ambiguity of the prime. In addition, repeated thematic role assignment resulted in Syntactic Priming (to a lesser degree), and verb form repetition facilitated lexical rather than structural processing. We conclude that Priming in comprehension involves lexically associated abstract Syntactic representations, and facilitation of verb and thematic role processes. The results also indicate that Syntactic computation errors during prime processing are not necessary for lexically-mediated Priming to occur during target processing. This result is inconsistent with an error-driven learning account of lexically-mediated Syntactic Priming effects.
-
Lexically-mediated Syntactic Priming effects in comprehension: Sources of facilitation.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2019Co-Authors: Kristen M. Tooley, Martin J. Pickering, Matthew J. TraxlerAbstract:The nature of the facilitation occurring when sentences share a verb and Syntactic structure (i.e., lexically-mediated Syntactic Priming) has not been adequately addressed in comprehension. In four...
-
QJE-STD-18-121.R2-Supplementary_Material – Supplemental material for Lexically-mediated Syntactic Priming effects in comprehension: Sources of facilitation
2019Co-Authors: Kristen M. Tooley, Martin J. Pickering, Matthew J. TraxlerAbstract:Supplemental material, QJE-STD-18-121.R2-Supplementary_Material for Lexically-mediated Syntactic Priming effects in comprehension: Sources of facilitation by Kristen M Tooley, Martin J Pickering and Matthew J Traxler in Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
-
Syntactic Priming during sentence comprehension: evidence for the lexical boost.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 2014Co-Authors: Matthew J. Traxler, Kristen M. Tooley, Martin J. PickeringAbstract:Syntactic Priming occurs when structural information from one sentence influences processing of a subsequently encountered sentence (Bock, 1986; Ledoux et al., 2007). This article reports two eye-tracking experiments investigating the effects of a prime sentence on the processing of a target sentence that shared aspects of Syntactic form. The experiments were designed to determine the degree to which lexical overlap between prime and target sentences produced larger effects, comparable to the widely observed ‘lexical boost’ in production experiments (Pickering & Branigan, 1998; Pickering & Ferreira, 2008). The current experiments showed that Priming effects during on-line comprehension were in fact larger when a verb was repeated across the prime and target sentences (see also Tooley et al., 2009). The finding of larger Priming effects with lexical repetition supports accounts under which Syntactic form representations are connected to individual lexical items (e.g., Vosse & Kempen, 2000, 2009; Tomasello, 2003).
-
Effects of phonological feedback on the selection of syntax: Evidence from between-language Syntactic Priming
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2011Co-Authors: Sarah Bernolet, Robert J. Hartsuiker, Martin J. PickeringAbstract:Research on word production in bilinguals has often shown an advantage for cognate words. According to some accounts, this cognate effect is caused by feedback from a level that represents information about phonemes (or graphemes) to a level concerned with the word. In order to investigate whether phonological feedback influences the selection of words and Syntactic constructions in late bilinguals, we investigated Syntactic Priming between Dutch and English genitive constructions (e.g., the fork of the girl vs. the girl's fork). The head nouns of prime and target constructions were always translation equivalents. Half of these were Dutch–English cognates with a large phonological overlap (e.g., vork–fork), the other half were non-cognates that had very few phonemes in common (e.g., eend–duck). Cognate status boosted between-language Syntactic Priming. Further analyses showed a continuous effect of phonological overlap for cognates and non-cognates, indicating that this boost was at least partly caused by feedback from the translation equivalents’ shared phonemes.
Holly P Branigan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Impaired implicit learning of Syntactic structure in children with developmental language disorder: Evidence from Syntactic Priming
SAGE Publishing, 2018Co-Authors: Maria Garraffa, Moreno I. Coco, Holly P BraniganAbstract:Background and aims Implicit learning mechanisms associated with detecting structural regularities have been proposed to underlie both the long-term acquisition of linguistic structure and a short-term tendency to repeat linguistic structure across sentences (structural Priming) in typically developing children. Recent research has suggested that a deficit in such mechanisms may explain the inconsistent trajectory of language learning displayed by children with Developmental Learning Disorder. We used a structural Priming paradigm to investigate whether a group of children with Developmental Learning Disorder showed impaired implicit learning of syntax (Syntactic Priming) following individual Syntactic experiences, and the time course of any such effects. Methods Five- to six-year-old Italian-speaking children with Developmental Learning Disorder and typically developing age-matched and language-matched controls played a picture-description-matching game with an experimenter. The experimenter’s descriptions were systematically manipulated so that children were exposed to both active and passive structures, in a randomized order. We investigated whether children’s descriptions used the same abstract syntax (active or passive) as the experimenter had used on an immediately preceding turn (no-delay) or three turns earlier (delay). We further examined whether children’s Syntactic production changed with increasing experience of passives within the experiment. Results Children with Developmental Learning Disorder’s Syntactic production was influenced by the syntax of the experimenter’s descriptions in the same way as typically developing language-matched children, but showed a different pattern from typically developing age-matched children. Children with Developmental Learning Disorder were more likely to produce passive syntax immediately after hearing a passive sentence than an active sentence, but this tendency was smaller than in typically developing age-matched children. After two intervening sentences, children with Developmental Learning Disorder no longer showed a significant Syntactic Priming effect, whereas typically developing age-matched children did. None of the groups showed a significant effect of cumulative Syntactic experience. Conclusions Children with Developmental Learning Disorder show a pattern of Syntactic Priming effects that is consistent with an impairment in implicit learning mechanisms that are associated with the detection and extraction of abstract structural regularities in linguistic input. Results suggest that this impairment involves reduced initial learning from each Syntactic experience, rather than atypically rapid decay following intact initial learning. Implications Children with Developmental Learning Disorder may learn less from each linguistic experience than typically developing children, and so require more input to achieve the same learning outcome with respect to syntax. Structural Priming is an effective technique for manipulating both input quality and quantity to determine precisely how Developmental Learning Disorder is related to language input, and to investigate how input tailored to take into account the cognitive profile of this population can be optimised in designing interventions
-
CogSci - Subject Relative Production in SLI Children during Syntactic Priming and Sentence Repetition
Cognitive Science, 2017Co-Authors: Moreno I. Coco, Maria Garraffa, Holly P BraniganAbstract:Subject Relative Production in SLI Children during Syntactic Priming and Sentence Repetition Moreno I. Coco (mcoco@staffmail.ed.ac.uk) School of Informatics (ILCC) University of Edinburgh 10 Crichton Street Edinburgh, EH8 9AB Maria Garraffa (mgarraff@staffmail.ed.ac.uk) School of Psychology University of Edinburgh 7 George Square Edinburgh, EH8 9JZ Abstract Holly P. Branigan (holly.branigan@ed.ac.uk) School of Psychology, University of Edinburgh 7 George Square Edinburgh, EH8 9JZ memory demands. We investigate this hypothesis by compar- ing SLIC’s and TDC’s production of SRCs in tasks where they are explicitly elicited (in a sentence repetition task) and when they are implicitly elicited (in a picture-description syn- tactic Priming paradigm). We use Bayesian Data Analysis to investigate our hypothesis, and design a series of Bayesian models to tackle it. Children with Specific Language Impairment (SLIC) experi- ence difficulties in processing Subject relative clauses (SRC). This has been interpreted as evidence that they lack syntac- tic representations for SRC. Our study investigates the spon- taneous production of SRC in typically developing children (TDC) and SLIC in a structural Priming paradigm, and com- pares their performance in a sentence repetition task. We demonstrate that SLIC are much more likely to produce SRC during Priming than in sentence repetition; moreover, when primed, their performance matches TDC’s baseline (unprimed) performance. Furthermore, we design two simple unsuper- vised Bayesian models, and predict the developmental group (SLI, TD) and Priming condition (Primed, Non-Primed). Over- all, this study shows that SLIC can spontaneously produce SRC when primed, suggesting their impairment is related to working memory, rather than a deficit in Syntactic knowledge. Experiment Substantial research has used a Syntactic Priming paradigm to demonstrate that people use abstract Syntactic representa- tions to process language (Bock, 1986; Pickering & Branigan, 1998). In such research, speakers show an increased tendency to use a particular structure after previously encountering the same structure (even with different lexical content). These ef- fects have been have been argued to provide evidence about Syntactic representation (Branigan et al., 1995). Recent re- search on TDC has therefore used Syntactic Priming to pro- vide evidence for the early acquisition of TDC’s Syntactic representations, e.g., passive constructions (e.g., Bencini & Valian 2008): If children are more likely to produce a partic- ular structure after previous exposure to it, it implies that they have an abstract representation for that structure, which can be facilitated through residual activation or implicit learning (Chang et al., 2006; Pickering & Branigan, 1998). The for- mer may explain short term Priming effects; the latter may explain long term and cumulative Priming effects. We argue that a Syntactic Priming paradigm can similarly be used to examine whether SLIC have access to an abstract representa- tion of SRC, whose availability can be incremented through Priming. To do this, we used a Snap Priming paradigm (Branigan et al., 2005), in which SLIC and TDC engaged in a card game that involved three elements: 1) listening to the experimenter describe a picture (using either a simple noun or an SRC), 2) describing their own picture, 3) and deciding whether or not the two pictures matched 1 . In the analysis, we assess whether the two groups (TDC, SLIC) differ in their production of SRC (Model 1); and test if any difference depends on the Priming condition (i.e., whether the experimenter’s description involved a simple noun or an SRC; Model 2). We expect TDC to have a higher production of SRC than SLIC. However, we expect SLIC to perform better in the primed than in the non-primed condi- Keywords: specific language impairment; language develop- ment; Syntactic Priming; sentence repetition; Bayesian data analysis. Introduction Subject relative clauses (SRC) such as the cat that’s on the ta- ble are generally early acquired, at around 3 years in typically developing children (TDC; e.g., Crain et al. 1990). However, children with Specific Language Impairment (SLIC) display difficulties in producing subject (and object) relative clauses (Novogrodsky & Friedmann, 2006). Preschool SLIC show a delayed onset of relative clause production, and frequent omission of the complementizer in both elicitation and spon- taneous production (Contemori & Garraffa, 2010). This diffi- culty extends to repetition of sentences involving SRCs. This is particularly interesting, because recent research has sug- gested that in TDC, prior exposure to even difficult struc- tures can facilitate their subsequent production (e.g., Bencini & Valian 2008). Such effects have been identified as mani- festations of Syntactic Priming, whereby an abstract Syntactic representation is facilitated (Bock, 1986). In adults, Syntactic Priming appears to be implicated in sentence repetition (Pot- ter & Lombardi, 1998). It is therefore striking that SLIC do not show facilitated production of SRC in sentence repetition, as we would expect a benefit from a Syntactic Priming effect, enhanced by lexical repetition. Previous research has therefore proposed that SLIC do not have a Syntactic representation of SRC (Conti-Ramsden et al., 2001). In this paper, we consider an alternative hypothesis, namely that SLIC’s poor performance in sentence repetition does not reflect a lack of Syntactic knowledge, but rather a task-specific difficulty, which may be related to working 1 On three quarters of trials, the pictures did not match, and on one quarter - Snap trials - they did match
-
Is young children's passive syntax semantically constrained? Evidence from Syntactic Priming.
Journal of Memory and Language, 2012Co-Authors: Katherine Messenger, Holly P Branigan, Janet F. Mclean, Antonella SoraceAbstract:Previous research suggests that English-speaking children comprehend agent–patient verb passives earlier than experiencer–theme verb passives (Maratsos, Fox, Becker, & Chalkley, 1985). We report three experiments examining whether such effects reflect delayed acquisition of the passive syntax or instead are an artifact of the experimental task, relating to children’s poor picture recognition for such verbs. In two Syntactic Priming experiments, 3- and 4-year-olds produced more agent–patient passives after hearing passive primes involving agent–patient and theme–experiencer verbs (Experiment 1), and theme–experiencer and experiencer–theme verbs (Experiment 2), than after corresponding active primes; moreover, the magnitude of Priming was unaffected by verb type. However, a picture-sentence matching task (Experiment 3) replicated previous findings: Children performed more poorly on experiencer–theme sentences than agent–patient sentences. Our results suggest that children’s acquisition of passive syntax is not delayed, and that semantic effects found in previous studies may instead be task-related.
-
The role of local and global Syntactic structure in language production: evidence from Syntactic Priming
Language and Cognitive Processes, 2006Co-Authors: Holly P Branigan, Martin J. Pickering, Janet F. Mclean, Andrew J. StewartAbstract:Experimental research has provided evidence for an autonomous stage of Syntactic processing during language production. We report eight Syntactic Priming experiments that investigated whether this stage uses the same procedures to produce phrases with a particular structure when they appear in different Syntactic contexts. Experiments 1–3 demonstrated Syntactic Priming for verb phrase structure in main clauses, irrespective of whether the global structure of the prime and target sentences varied. Experiments 4–6 demonstrated Syntactic Priming for verb phrase structure in subordinate clauses, both when prime and target were both subordinate clauses, and when one was a subordinate clause and the other was a main clause. Experiments 7 and 8 directly compared Syntactic Priming between main and subordinate clauses with Priming between main clauses and Priming between subordinate clauses. We interpret these results as evidence that the processor uses the same procedures to build Syntactic structure in different...
-
Syntactic Priming in spoken production: Linguistic and temporal interference
Memory & Cognition, 2000Co-Authors: Holly P Branigan, Martin J. Pickering, Andrew J. Stewart, Janet F. McleanAbstract:Current evidence about the persistence of Syntactic Priming effects (Bock, 1986) is equivocal: Using spoken picture description, Bock and Griffin (2000) found that it persisted over as many as 10 trials; using written sentence completion, Branigan, Pickering, and Cleland (1999) found that it dissipated if even a single sentence intervened between prime and target. This paper asks what causes it to be long lasting. On one account, the rapid decay evidenced by Branigan et al. occurs because the task emphasizes conceptual planning; on another account, it is due to the written nature of their task. If conceptual planning is the cause, this might relate to planning the prime sentence or planning an intervening sentence. Hence we conducted an experiment with spoken sentence completion, contrasting no delay, an intervening sentence, and a pure temporal delay. The results indicated that strong and similar Priming occurred in all three cases, therefore lending support to the claim that spoken Priming is long lasting.
Janet F. Mclean - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Is young children's passive syntax semantically constrained? Evidence from Syntactic Priming.
Journal of Memory and Language, 2012Co-Authors: Katherine Messenger, Holly P Branigan, Janet F. Mclean, Antonella SoraceAbstract:Previous research suggests that English-speaking children comprehend agent–patient verb passives earlier than experiencer–theme verb passives (Maratsos, Fox, Becker, & Chalkley, 1985). We report three experiments examining whether such effects reflect delayed acquisition of the passive syntax or instead are an artifact of the experimental task, relating to children’s poor picture recognition for such verbs. In two Syntactic Priming experiments, 3- and 4-year-olds produced more agent–patient passives after hearing passive primes involving agent–patient and theme–experiencer verbs (Experiment 1), and theme–experiencer and experiencer–theme verbs (Experiment 2), than after corresponding active primes; moreover, the magnitude of Priming was unaffected by verb type. However, a picture-sentence matching task (Experiment 3) replicated previous findings: Children performed more poorly on experiencer–theme sentences than agent–patient sentences. Our results suggest that children’s acquisition of passive syntax is not delayed, and that semantic effects found in previous studies may instead be task-related.
-
Lexical and phonological effects on Syntactic processing: evidence from Syntactic Priming
Journal of Memory and Language, 2010Co-Authors: Mikel Santesteban, Martin J. Pickering, Janet F. McleanAbstract:We investigated whether phonological relationships at the lexical level affect Syntactic encoding during sentence production. Cleland and Pickering (2003) showed that Syntactic Priming effects are enhanced by semantic, but not phonological relations between lexical items, suggesting that there are no effects of phonology on Syntactic encoding. Here we report four experiments investigating the influence of homophones on Syntactic Priming. When describing the picture of a flying bat, Experiments 1 and 2 revealed that people tended to produce relative-clauses such as the bat that’s red (instead of the red bat) more often after hearing the bat that’s red (referring to a cricket bat), than after the pool that’s red. Experiments 3 and 4 revealed that mediated homophone–semantic relations between lexical items (e.g., flying bat–racket) do not enhance Syntactic Priming. We interpret these results in terms of theories of Syntactic encoding.
-
The role of local and global Syntactic structure in language production: evidence from Syntactic Priming
Language and Cognitive Processes, 2006Co-Authors: Holly P Branigan, Martin J. Pickering, Janet F. Mclean, Andrew J. StewartAbstract:Experimental research has provided evidence for an autonomous stage of Syntactic processing during language production. We report eight Syntactic Priming experiments that investigated whether this stage uses the same procedures to produce phrases with a particular structure when they appear in different Syntactic contexts. Experiments 1–3 demonstrated Syntactic Priming for verb phrase structure in main clauses, irrespective of whether the global structure of the prime and target sentences varied. Experiments 4–6 demonstrated Syntactic Priming for verb phrase structure in subordinate clauses, both when prime and target were both subordinate clauses, and when one was a subordinate clause and the other was a main clause. Experiments 7 and 8 directly compared Syntactic Priming between main and subordinate clauses with Priming between main clauses and Priming between subordinate clauses. We interpret these results as evidence that the processor uses the same procedures to build Syntactic structure in different...
-
Syntactic Priming in spoken production: Linguistic and temporal interference
Memory & Cognition, 2000Co-Authors: Holly P Branigan, Martin J. Pickering, Andrew J. Stewart, Janet F. McleanAbstract:Current evidence about the persistence of Syntactic Priming effects (Bock, 1986) is equivocal: Using spoken picture description, Bock and Griffin (2000) found that it persisted over as many as 10 trials; using written sentence completion, Branigan, Pickering, and Cleland (1999) found that it dissipated if even a single sentence intervened between prime and target. This paper asks what causes it to be long lasting. On one account, the rapid decay evidenced by Branigan et al. occurs because the task emphasizes conceptual planning; on another account, it is due to the written nature of their task. If conceptual planning is the cause, this might relate to planning the prime sentence or planning an intervening sentence. Hence we conducted an experiment with spoken sentence completion, contrasting no delay, an intervening sentence, and a pure temporal delay. The results indicated that strong and similar Priming occurred in all three cases, therefore lending support to the claim that spoken Priming is long lasting.
Peter Hagoort - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Primed From the Start: Syntactic Priming During the First Days of Language Learning
Language Learning, 2018Co-Authors: Kirsten Weber, Morten H. Christiansen, Peter Indefrey, Peter HagoortAbstract:New linguistic information must be integrated into our existing language system. Using a novel experimental task that incorporates a Syntactic Priming paradigm into artificial language learning, we investigated how new grammatical regularities and words are learned. This innovation allowed us to control the language input the learner received, while the Syntactic Priming paradigm provided insight into the nature of the underlying Syntactic processing machinery. The results of the present study pointed to facilitatory Syntactic processing effects within the first days of learning: Syntactic and lexical Priming effects revealed participants' sensitivity to both novel words and word orders. This suggested that novel Syntactic structures and their meaning (form-function mapping) can be acquired rapidly through incidental learning. More generally, our study indicated similar mechanisms for learning and processing in both artificial and natural languages, with implications for the relationship between first and second language learning.
-
the role of nondeclarative memory in the skill for language evidence from Syntactic Priming in patients with amnesia
Neuropsychologia, 2017Co-Authors: Evelien Heyselaar, Katrien Segaert, Roy P. C. Kessels, S.j.w. Walvoort, Peter HagoortAbstract:Syntactic Priming, the phenomenon in which participants adopt the linguistic behaviour of their partner, is widely used in psycholinguistics to investigate Syntactic operations. Although the phenomenon of Syntactic Priming is well documented, the memory system that supports the retention of this Syntactic information long enough to influence future utterances, is not as widely investigated. We aim to shed light on this issue by assessing patients with Korsakoff's amnesia on an active-passive Syntactic Priming task and compare their performance to controls matched in age, education, and premorbid intelligence. Patients with Korsakoff's syndrome display deficits in all subdomains of declarative memory, yet their nondeclarative memory remains intact, making them an ideal patient group to determine which memory system supports Syntactic Priming. In line with the hypothesis that Syntactic Priming relies on nondeclarative memory, the patient group shows strong Priming tendencies (12.6% passive structure repetition). Our healthy control group did not show a Priming tendency, presumably due to cognitive interference between declarative and nondeclarative memory. We discuss the results in relation to amnesia, aging, and compensatory mechanisms.
-
A little more conversation - The influence of communicative context on Syntactic Priming in brain and behavior
Frontiers in Psychology, 2014Co-Authors: Lotte Schoot, Peter Hagoort, Laura Menenti, Katrien SegaertAbstract:We report on an fMRI Syntactic Priming experiment in which we measure brain activity for participants who communicate with another participant outside the scanner. We investigated whether Syntactic processing during overt language production and comprehension is influenced by having a (shared) goal to communicate. Although theory suggests this is true, the nature of this influence remains unclear. Two hypotheses are tested: i. Syntactic Priming effects (fMRI and RT) are stronger for participants in the communicative context than for participants doing the same experiment in a non-communicative context, and ii. Syntactic Priming magnitude (RT) is correlated with the Syntactic Priming magnitude of the speaker’s communicative partner. Results showed that across conditions, participants were faster to produce sentences with repeated syntax, relative to novel syntax. This behavioral result converged with the fMRI data: we found repetition suppression effects in the left insula extending into left inferior frontal gyrus (BA 47/45), left middle temporal gyrus (BA 21), left inferior parietal cortex (BA 40), left precentral gyrus (BA 6), bilateral precuneus (BA 7), bilateral supplementary motor cortex (BA 32/8) and right insula (BA 47). We did not find support for the first hypothesis: having a communicative intention does not increase the magnitude of Syntactic Priming effects (either in the brain or in behavior) per se. We did find support for the second hypothesis: if speaker A is strongly/weakly primed by speaker B, then speaker B is primed by speaker A to a similar extent. We conclude that Syntactic processing is influenced by being in a communicative context, and that the nature of this influence is bi-directional: speakers are influenced by each other.
-
Bidirectional Syntactic Priming in conversation: I am primed by you if you are primed by me
2014Co-Authors: Lotte Schoot, Peter Hagoort, Katrien SegaertAbstract:We investigate whether the magnitude of Syntactic Priming effects, like other aspects of linguistic behavior, is mimicked between speakers in a conversation. Speakers adapt Syntactic structures to their interlocutor (i.e. Syntactic Priming), but what is more, speakers adapt the magnitude of Syntactic Priming effects to interlocutor's magnitude (Schoot et al. 2014). We expect to replicate and extend this finding with the present results. 60 participants were divided into 30 pairs who performed the experiment together. They were asked to describe photographs to each other, depicting two persons performing a transitive action (e.g. a man hugging a woman). Descriptions were actives or passives (no free choice, see Menenti et al., 2011). Priming effects were measured by comparing speech onset latencies for sentences with repeated syntax (two consecutive actives or passives) relative to novel syntax (active follows passive or vice versa). Before participants performed this communicative task, we ran a non-communicative pre-test for each participant, to measure their individual Priming effect without influence of the partner's Priming effect. The results show that Priming magnitude is determined by your partner's Priming effect; the more your partner is primed by you, the more you are primed by your partner (r = 0.572, p < 0.002, Figure A). Furthermore, the difference between paired speakers' individual Syntactic Priming effects (as measured in the pre-test) predicted how much speakers adapt their Syntactic Priming effects when they are communicating with their partner in the communicative experiment (s = -0.632, p < 0.001, Figure B). If in the pre-test, your partner is primed more/less by you than you are by her, you will increase/decrease your own Priming magnitude towards your partner's Priming magnitude in the communicative context. Syntactic Priming effects in conversation are said to result from speakers aligning their Syntactic representations by mimicking sentence structure (Pickering & Garrod, 2004; Jaeger & Snider, 2013). Here we show that on top of that, the magnitude of Priming effects is also mimicked between interlocutors. Although measuring Syntactic Priming effects in speech onset latencies is now proven to be a valid method (Corley & Scheepers 2002; Segaert et al. 2010; 2014; Smith & Wheeldon 2000; Wheeldon & Smith 2003), we are currently running an experiment to investigate whether we can replicate this effect when looking at Syntactic Priming magnitude in structure choices.
-
Syntactic Priming and the lexical boost effect during sentence production and sentence comprehension: An fMRI study
Brain and Language, 2013Co-Authors: Katrien Segaert, Gerard Kempen, Karl Magnus Petersson, Peter HagoortAbstract:Behavioral Syntactic Priming effects during sentence comprehension are typically observed only if both the Syntactic structure and lexical head are repeated. In contrast, during production Syntactic Priming occurs with structure repetition alone, but the effect is boosted by repetition of the lexical head. We used fMRI to investigate the neuronal correlates of Syntactic Priming and lexical boost effects during sentence production and comprehension. The critical measure was the magnitude of fMRI adaptation to repetition of sentences in active or passive voice, with or without verb repetition. In conditions with repeated verbs, we observed adaptation to structure repetition in the left IFG and MTG, for active and passive voice. However, in the absence of repeated verbs, adaptation occurred only for passive sentences. None of the fMRI adaptation effects yielded differential effects for production versus comprehension, suggesting that sentence comprehension and production are subserved by the same neuronal infrastructure for Syntactic processing.
Rachel I Mayberry - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Syntactic Priming in american sign language
PLOS ONE, 2015Co-Authors: Matthew L Hall, Victor S Ferreira, Rachel I MayberryAbstract:Psycholinguistic studies of sign language processing provide valuable opportunities to assess whether language phenomena, which are primarily studied in spoken language, are fundamentally shaped by peripheral biology. For example, we know that when given a choice between two Syntactically permissible ways to express the same proposition, speakers tend to choose structures that were recently used, a phenomenon known as Syntactic Priming. Here, we report two experiments testing Syntactic Priming of a noun phrase construction in American Sign Language (ASL). Experiment 1 shows that second language (L2) signers with normal hearing exhibit Syntactic Priming in ASL and that Priming is stronger when the head noun is repeated between prime and target (the lexical boost effect). Experiment 2 shows that Syntactic Priming is equally strong among deaf native L1 signers, deaf late L1 learners, and hearing L2 signers. Experiment 2 also tested for, but did not find evidence of, phonological or semantic boosts to Syntactic Priming in ASL. These results show that despite the profound differences between spoken and signed languages in terms of how they are produced and perceived, the psychological representation of sentence structure (as assessed by Syntactic Priming) operates similarly in sign and speech.
-
Syntactic Priming in American Sign Language.
PLOS ONE, 2015Co-Authors: Matthew L Hall, Victor S Ferreira, Rachel I MayberryAbstract:Psycholinguistic studies of sign language processing provide valuable opportunities to assess whether language phenomena, which are primarily studied in spoken language, are fundamentally shaped by peripheral biology. For example, we know that when given a choice between two Syntactically permissible ways to express the same proposition, speakers tend to choose structures that were recently used, a phenomenon known as Syntactic Priming. Here, we report two experiments testing Syntactic Priming of a noun phrase construction in American Sign Language (ASL). Experiment 1 shows that second language (L2) signers with normal hearing exhibit Syntactic Priming in ASL and that Priming is stronger when the head noun is repeated between prime and target (the lexical boost effect). Experiment 2 shows that Syntactic Priming is equally strong among deaf native L1 signers, deaf late L1 learners, and hearing L2 signers. Experiment 2 also tested for, but did not find evidence of, phonological or semantic boosts to Syntactic Priming in ASL. These results show that despite the profound differences between spoken and signed languages in terms of how they are produced and perceived, the psychological representation of sentence structure (as assessed by Syntactic Priming) operates similarly in sign and speech.
