TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluating the timecourses of morpho-orthographic, lexical, and grammatical processing following rapid parallel visual presentation
T2 - An EEG investigation in English
AU - Dunagan, Donald
AU - Jordan, Tyson
AU - Hale, John T.
AU - Pylkkänen, Liina
AU - Chacón, Dustin A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2025/4
Y1 - 2025/4
N2 - Theories of language processing – and typical experimental methodologies – emphasize the word-by-word processing of sentences. This paradigm is good for approximating speech or careful text reading, but arguably, not for the common, cursory glances used while reading short sentences (e.g., cellphone notifications, social media posts). How can we interpret a sentence in a single glance? In an electroencephalography (EEG) study, brain responses to grammatical sentences (the dogs chase a ball) presented for 200 ms diverged from non-lexical consonant strings (thj rjxb zkhtb w lhct) ∼160 ms post-sentence onset and from scrambled constructions (a dogs chase ball the) ∼250 ms post-sentence onset, demonstrating – at different time points – rapid recognition and cursory analysis of linguistic stimuli. In the grammatical sentences, unigram probability correlated with EEG data ∼150–300 ms post-sentence onset, and probability of the word given its context estimated by BERT correlated with EEG data after ∼700–800 ms. EEG responses did not diverge between grammatical sentences and their counterparts with ungrammatical agreement (the dogs chases a ball), although EEG responses did diverge for plural vs. singular morphology at ∼200 ms. These results suggest that ‘at-a-glance’ reading is possible, based on coactivation of individual lexical items, morphological structures, and constituent structure at ∼200-300 ms, but that words are not integrated into a coherent syntactic/semantic analysis, as evidenced by the substantially later responses to BERT probability and the absence of sensitivity to agreement errors.
AB - Theories of language processing – and typical experimental methodologies – emphasize the word-by-word processing of sentences. This paradigm is good for approximating speech or careful text reading, but arguably, not for the common, cursory glances used while reading short sentences (e.g., cellphone notifications, social media posts). How can we interpret a sentence in a single glance? In an electroencephalography (EEG) study, brain responses to grammatical sentences (the dogs chase a ball) presented for 200 ms diverged from non-lexical consonant strings (thj rjxb zkhtb w lhct) ∼160 ms post-sentence onset and from scrambled constructions (a dogs chase ball the) ∼250 ms post-sentence onset, demonstrating – at different time points – rapid recognition and cursory analysis of linguistic stimuli. In the grammatical sentences, unigram probability correlated with EEG data ∼150–300 ms post-sentence onset, and probability of the word given its context estimated by BERT correlated with EEG data after ∼700–800 ms. EEG responses did not diverge between grammatical sentences and their counterparts with ungrammatical agreement (the dogs chases a ball), although EEG responses did diverge for plural vs. singular morphology at ∼200 ms. These results suggest that ‘at-a-glance’ reading is possible, based on coactivation of individual lexical items, morphological structures, and constituent structure at ∼200-300 ms, but that words are not integrated into a coherent syntactic/semantic analysis, as evidenced by the substantially later responses to BERT probability and the absence of sensitivity to agreement errors.
KW - Agreement
KW - EEG
KW - Psycholinguistics
KW - Reading
KW - Sentence processing
KW - Syntax
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85217056777&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85217056777&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106080
DO - 10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106080
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85217056777
SN - 0010-0277
VL - 257
JO - Cognition
JF - Cognition
M1 - 106080
ER -