@article{RaelingHolzgrefeLangSchroederetal.2015,
  author    = {R{\"a}ling, Romy and Holzgrefe-Lang, Julia and Schr{\"o}der, Astrid and Wartenburger, Isabell},
  title     = {On the influence of typicality and age of acquisition on semantic processing: Diverging evidence from behavioural and ERP responses},
  series = {Neuropsychologia : an international journal in behavioural and cognitive neuroscience},
  volume    = {75},
  journal   = {Neuropsychologia : an international journal in behavioural and cognitive neuroscience},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Oxford},
  issn      = {0028-3932},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.05.031},
  pages     = {186 -- 200},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Various behavioural studies show that semantic typicality (TYP) and age of acquisition (AOA) of a specific word influence processing time and accuracy during the performance of lexical-semantic tasks. This study examines the influence of TYP and AOA on semantic processing at behavioural (response times and accuracy data) and electrophysiological levels using an auditory category-member-verification task. Reaction time data reveal independent TYP and AOA effects, while in the accuracy data and the event-related potentials predominantly effects of TYP can be found. The present study thus confirms previous findings and extends evidence found in the visual modality to the auditory modality. A modality-independent influence on semantic word processing is manifested. However, with regard to the influence of AOA, the diverging results raise questions on the origin of AOA effects as well as on the interpretation of offline and online data. Hence, results will be discussed against the background of recent theories on N400 correlates in semantic processing. In addition, an argument in favour of a complementary use of research techniques will be made. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{AydelottBaerHenneyTrzaskowskietal.2012,
  author    = {Aydelott, Jennifer and Baer-Henney, Dinah and Trzaskowski, Maciej and Leech, Robert and Dick, Frederic},
  title     = {Sentence comprehension in competing speech dichotic sentence-word priming reveals hemispheric differences in auditory semantic processing},
  series = {Language and cognitive processes},
  volume    = {27},
  journal   = {Language and cognitive processes},
  number    = {7-8},
  publisher = {Wiley},
  address   = {Hove},
  issn      = {0169-0965},
  doi       = {10.1080/01690965.2011.589735},
  pages     = {1108 -- 1144},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {This study examined the effects of competing speech on auditory semantic comprehension using a dichotic sentence-word priming paradigm. Lexical decision performance for target words presented in spoken sentences was compared in strongly and weakly biasing semantic contexts. Targets were either congruent or incongruent with the sentential bias. Sentences were presented to one auditory channel (right or left), either in isolation or with competing speech produced by a single talker of the same gender presented simultaneously. The competing speech signal was either presented in the same auditory channel as the sentence context, or in a different auditory channel, and was either meaningful (played forward) or unintelligible (time-reversed). Biasing contexts presented in isolation facilitated responses to congruent targets and inhibited responses to incongruent targets, relative to a neutral baseline. Facilitation priming was reduced or eliminated by competing speech presented in the same auditory channel, supporting previous findings that semantic activation is highly sensitive to the intelligibility of the context signal. Competing speech presented in a different auditory channel affected facilitation priming differentially depending upon ear of presentation, suggesting hemispheric differences in the processing of the attended and competing signals. Results were consistent with previous claims of a right ear advantage for meaningful speech, as well as with visual word recognition findings implicating the left hemisphere in the generation of semantic predictions and the right hemisphere in the integration of newly encountered words into the sentence-level meaning. Unlike facilitation priming, inhibition was relatively robust to the energetic and informational masking effects of competing speech and was not influenced by the strength of the contextual bias or the meaningfulness of the competing signal, supporting a two-process model of sentence priming in which inhibition reflects later-stage, expectancy-driven strategic processes that may benefit from perceptual reanalysis after initial semantic activation.},
  language  = {en}
}