@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}
}
@misc{HiltonRaelingWartenburgeretal.2019,
  author    = {Hilton, Matt and R{\"a}ling, Romy and Wartenburger, Isabell and Elsner, Birgit},
  title     = {Parallels in Processing Boundary Cues in Speech and Action},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {579},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-43797},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-437975},
  pages     = {12},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Speech and action sequences are continuous streams of information that can be segmented into sub-units. In both domains, this segmentation can be facilitated by perceptual cues contained within the information stream. In speech, prosodic cues (e.g., a pause, pre-boundary lengthening, and pitch rise) mark boundaries between words and phrases, while boundaries between actions of an action sequence can be marked by kinematic cues (e.g., a pause, pre-boundary deceleration). The processing of prosodic boundary cues evokes an Event-related Potentials (ERP) component known as the Closure Positive Shift (CPS), and it is possible that the CPS reflects domaingeneral cognitive processes involved in segmentation, given that the CPS is also evoked by boundaries between subunits of non-speech auditory stimuli. This study further probed the domain-generality of the CPS and its underlying processes by investigating electrophysiological correlates of the processing of boundary cues in sequences of spoken verbs (auditory stimuli; Experiment 1; N = 23 adults) and actions (visual stimuli; Experiment 2; N = 23 adults). The EEG data from both experiments revealed a CPS-like broadly distributed positivity during the 250 ms prior to the onset of the post-boundary word or action, indicating similar electrophysiological correlates of boundary processing across domains, suggesting that the cognitive processes underlying speech and action segmentation might also be shared.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HiltonRaelingWartenburgeretal.2019,
  author    = {Hilton, Matt and R{\"a}ling, Romy and Wartenburger, Isabell and Elsner, Birgit},
  title     = {Parallels in Processing Boundary Cues in Speech and Action},
  series = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  volume    = {10},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01566},
  pages     = {12},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Speech and action sequences are continuous streams of information that can be segmented into sub-units. In both domains, this segmentation can be facilitated by perceptual cues contained within the information stream. In speech, prosodic cues (e.g., a pause, pre-boundary lengthening, and pitch rise) mark boundaries between words and phrases, while boundaries between actions of an action sequence can be marked by kinematic cues (e.g., a pause, pre-boundary deceleration). The processing of prosodic boundary cues evokes an Event-related Potentials (ERP) component known as the Closure Positive Shift (CPS), and it is possible that the CPS reflects domaingeneral cognitive processes involved in segmentation, given that the CPS is also evoked by boundaries between subunits of non-speech auditory stimuli. This study further probed the domain-generality of the CPS and its underlying processes by investigating electrophysiological correlates of the processing of boundary cues in sequences of spoken verbs (auditory stimuli; Experiment 1; N = 23 adults) and actions (visual stimuli; Experiment 2; N = 23 adults). The EEG data from both experiments revealed a CPS-like broadly distributed positivity during the 250 ms prior to the onset of the post-boundary word or action, indicating similar electrophysiological correlates of boundary processing across domains, suggesting that the cognitive processes underlying speech and action segmentation might also be shared.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{RaelingSchroederWartenburger2016,
  author    = {R{\"a}ling, Romy and Schr{\"o}der, Astrid and Wartenburger, Isabell},
  title     = {The origins of age of acquisition and typicality effects: Semantic processing in aphasia and the ageing brain},
  series = {Neuropsychologia : an international journal in behavioural and cognitive neuroscience},
  volume    = {86},
  journal   = {Neuropsychologia : an international journal in behavioural and cognitive neuroscience},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Oxford},
  issn      = {0028-3932},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.04.019},
  pages     = {80 -- 92},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Age of acquisition (AOA) has frequently been shown to influence response times and accuracy rates in word processing and constitutes a meaningful variable in aphasic language processing, while its origin in the language processing system is still under debate. To find out where AOA originates and whether and how it is related to another important psycholinguistic variable, namely semantic typicality (TYP), we studied healthy, elderly controls and semantically impaired individuals using semantic priming. For this purpose, we collected reaction times and accuracy rates as well as event-related potential data in an auditory category-member-verification task. The present results confirm a semantic origin of TYP, but question the same for AOA while favouring its origin at the phonology-semantics interface. The data are further interpreted in consideration of recent theories of ageing. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{RaelingHanneSchroederetal.2016,
  author    = {R{\"a}ling, Romy and Hanne, Sandra and Schr{\"o}der, Astrid and Keßler, Carla and Wartenburger, Isabell},
  title     = {Judging the animacy of words},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-98402},
  pages     = {11},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {The age at which members of a semantic category are learned (age of acquisition), the typicality they demonstrate within their corresponding category, and the semantic domain to which they belong (living, non-living) are known to influence the speed and accuracy of lexical/semantic processing. So far, only a few studies have looked at the origin of age of acquisition and its interdependence with typicality and semantic domain within the same experimental design. Twenty adult participants performed an animacy decision task in which nouns were classified according to their semantic domain as being living or non-living. Response times were influenced by the independent main effects of each parameter: typicality, age of acquisition, semantic domain, and frequency. However, there were no interactions. The results are discussed with respect to recent models concerning the origin of age of acquisition effects.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{RaelingHanneSchroederetal.2017,
  author    = {R{\"a}ling, Romy and Hanne, Sandra and Schr{\"o}der, Astrid and Keßler, Carla and Wartenburger, Isabell},
  title     = {Judging the animacy of words},
  series = {Quarterly journal of experimental psychology},
  volume    = {70},
  journal   = {Quarterly journal of experimental psychology},
  number    = {10},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {1747-0218},
  doi       = {10.1080/17470218.2016.1223704},
  pages     = {2094 -- 2104},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {The age at which members of a semantic category are learned (age of acquisition), the typicality they demonstrate within their corresponding category, and the semantic domain to which they belong (living, non-living) are known to influence the speed and accuracy of lexical/semantic processing. So far, only a few studies have looked at the origin of age of acquisition and its interdependence with typicality and semantic domain within the same experimental design. Twenty adult participants performed an animacy decision task in which nouns were classified according to their semantic domain as being living or non-living. Response times were influenced by the independent main effects of each parameter: typicality, age of acquisition, semantic domain, and frequency. However, there were no interactions. The results are discussed with respect to recent models concerning the origin of age of acquisition effects.},
  language  = {en}
}