The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Age-related and individual differences in the use of prediction during language comprehension
Open accessAbstract
During sentence comprehension, older adults are less likely than younger adults to predict features of likely upcoming words. A pair of experiments assessed whether such differences would extend to tasks with reduced working memory demands and time pressures. In Experiment 1, event-related brain potentials were measured as younger and older adults read short phrases cuing antonyms or category exemplars, followed three seconds later by targets that were either congruent or incongruent and, for congruent category exemplars, of higher or lower typicality. When processing the less expected low typicality targets, younger – but not older – adults elicited a prefrontal positivity (500–900 ms) that has been linked to processing consequences of having predictions disconfirmed. Thus, age-related changes in prediction during comprehension generalize across task circumstances. Analyses of individual differences revealed that older adults with higher category fluency were more likely to show the young-like pattern. Experiment 2 showed that these age-related differences were not due to simple slowing of language production mechanisms, as older adults generated overt responses to the cues as quickly as – and more accurately than – younger adults. However, older adults who were relatively faster to produce category exemplars in Experiment 2 were more likely to have shown predictive processing patterns in Experiment 1. Taken together, the results link prediction during language comprehension to language production mechanisms and suggest that although older adults can produce speeded language output on demand, they are less likely to automatically recruit these mechanisms during comprehension unless top-down circuitry is particularly strong.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory
Oldfield, R. C. (1971) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4 · Cited by 35,900
Longitudinal Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies of Older Adults: A Shrinking Brain
Resnick, S. M., Pham, D. L., Kraut, M. A., Zonderman, A. B., & Davatzikos, C. (2003) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.23-08-03295.2003 · Cited by 1,425
How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise.
Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Schneider, B. A., & Daneman, M. (1995) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.412282 · Cited by 1,089
Rönnlund, M., Nyberg, L., Bäckman, L., & Nilsson, L.-G. (2005) · Psychology and Aging · doi:10.1037/0882-7974.20.1.3 · Cited by 839
Aging and dual-task performance: A meta-analysis.
Verhaeghen, P., Steitz, D. W., Sliwinski, M. J., & Cerella, J. (2003) · Psychology and Aging · doi:10.1037/0882-7974.18.3.443 · Cited by 496
Does the capacity of working memory change with age?
Wingfield, A., Stine, E. A. L., Lahar, C. J., & Aberdeen, J. S. (1988) · Experimental Aging Research · doi:10.1080/03610738808259731 · Cited by 257
The locus of adult intelligence: Knowledge, abilities, and nonability traits
Ackerman, P. L., & Rolfhus, E. L. (1999) · Psychology and Aging · doi:10.1037/0882-7974.14.2.314 · Cited by 156
Cited by
What do we mean by prediction in language comprehension?
Kuperberg, G. R., & Jaeger, T. F. (2016) · Language, Cognition and Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/23273798.2015.1102299 · Cited by 1,087
What do verbal fluency tasks measure? Predictors of verbal fluency performance in older adults
Shao, Z., Janse, E., Visser, K., & Meyer, A. S. (2014) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00772 · Cited by 905
Four central questions about prediction in language processing
Huettig, F. (2015) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2015.02.014 · Cited by 405
fMRI reveals language-specific predictive coding during naturalistic sentence comprehension
Shain, C., Blank, I. A., van Schijndel, M., Schuler, W., & Fedorenko, E. (2020) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2019.107307 · Cited by 215
Cognitive control ability mediates prediction costs in monolinguals and bilinguals
Zirnstein, M., van Hell, J. G., & Kroll, J. F. (2018) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2018.03.001 · Cited by 84
Metadata
- Authors
- Federmeier, K. D., Kutas, M., & Schul, R.
- Venue
- Brain and Language
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-12
- Volume
- 115
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 149-161
- ISSN
- 0093-934X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2149648827
- Cited by
- 333
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 3.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Age-related and individual differences in the use of prediction during language comprehension. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.bandl.2010.07.006
- The paper
- Federmeier, K. D., Kutas, M., & Schul, R. (2010). Age-related and individual differences in the use of prediction during language comprehension. Brain and Language. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2010.07.006
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.