4.6 Article

Special Issue Mapping sound to meaning under challenging conditions: Research Very early and late form-to-meaning computations during visual word recognition as revealed by electrophysiology

期刊

CORTEX
卷 157, 期 -, 页码 167-193

出版社

ELSEVIER MASSON, CORP OFF
DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2022.07.016

关键词

Phonology-semantics consistency; Orthography-semantics consistency; EEG; Visual word recognition; Form-meaning relation

资金

  1. Italian Ministry of Health [GR-2018-12366092]
  2. Italian Ministry of Health (Ricerca Corrente)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study used a large-scale data-driven approach to investigate the role of word form in accessing semantics. The results show that meaning is accessed through two distinct paths during visual word recognition, which mutually contribute to the recognition process. The system may exploit a dual mechanism for semantic access.
We used a large-scale data-driven approach to investigate the role of word form in accessing semantics. By using distributional semantic methods and taking advantage of an ERP lexical decision mega-study, we investigated the exact time dynamic of semantic ac-cess from printed words as driven by orthography-semantics consistency (OSC) and phonology-semantics consistency (PSC). Generalized Additive Models revealed very early and late OSC-by-PSC interactions, visible at 100 and 400 msec, respectively. This pattern suggests that, during visual word recognition: a) meaning is accessed by means of two distinct and interactive paths -the orthography-to-meaning and the orthography-to -phonology-to-meaning path-, which mutually contribute to recognition since early stages; b) the system may exploit a dual mechanism for semantic access, with early and late effects associated to a fast-coarse and a slow-fine grained semantic analysis, respec-tively. The results also highlight the high sensitivity of the visual word recognition system to arbitrary form-meaning relations.(c) 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据