English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
Add to Basket
  DetailsSummary

Released
Journal Article

The P600 in Implicit Artificial Grammar Learning

MPS-Authors

Folia,  Vasiliki
Neurobiology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour;

/persons/resource/persons69

Hagoort,  Peter
Neurobiology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour;

/persons/resource/persons147

Petersson,  Karl Magnus
Neurobiology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour;
Cognitive Neuroscience Research Group, Centre for Biomedical Research (CBMR), Universidade do Algarve, Portugal;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)

Silva_etal_2017.pdf
(Publisher version), 711KB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Silva, S., Folia, V., Hagoort, P., & Petersson, K. M. (2017). The P600 in Implicit Artificial Grammar Learning. Cognitive Science, 41(1), 137-157. doi:10.1111/cogs.12343.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0028-EF45-5
Abstract
The suitability of the Artificial Grammar Learning (AGL) paradigm to capture relevant aspects of the acquisition of linguistic structures has been empirically tested in a number of EEG studies. Some have shown a syntax-related P600 component, but it has not been ruled out that the AGL P600 effect is a response to surface features (e.g., subsequence familiarity) rather than the underlying syntax structure. Therefore, in this study, we controlled for the surface characteristics of the test sequences (associative chunk strength) and recorded the EEG before (baseline preference classification) and after (preference and grammaticality classification) exposure to a grammar. A typical, centroparietal P600 effect was elicited by grammatical violations after exposure, suggesting that the AGL P600 effect signals a response to structural irregularities. Moreover, preference and grammaticality classification showed a qualitatively similar ERP profile, strengthening the idea that the implicit structural mere exposure paradigm in combination with preference classification is a suitable alternative to the traditional grammaticality classification test.