The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Expect the Unexpected: Event-related Brain Response to Morphosyntactic Violations
Open accessAbstract
Arguments about the existence of language-specific neural systems and particularly arguments about the independence of syntactic and semantic processing have recently focused on differences between the event-related potentials (ERPs) elicited by violations of syntactic structure (e.g. the P600) and those elicited by violations of semantic expectancy (e.g. the N400). However, the scalp distribution of the P600 component elicited by syntactic violations appears to resemble that elicited by rare categorical events (ldquo;odd-balls”) in non-linguistic contexts, frequently termed the P3b. The relationship between the P600 and the P3b was explored by manipulating the grammaticality of sentences read for comprehension, as well as two factors known to influence P3b amplitude: odd-ball probability and event saliency. Oddball probability was manipulated by varying the frequency of morphosyntactic violations within blocks of sentences, and event saliency was manipulated by using two types of morphosyntactic violations, one of which was more striking than the other. The results indicate that the amplitude of the P600, like the P3b, was sensitive to both the probability and saliency manipulations, and that the scalp distributions for the effect of probability and grammaticality are essentially similar. An unexpected, but not wholly surprising, finding was the elicitation of an anterior negativity between 300 and 500 msec post-word onset, which may index working memory operations involved in sentence processing.
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
Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating?
Donchin, E., & Coles, M. G. H. (1988) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00058027 · Cited by 3,585
Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development
Elman, J., Bates, E., Johnson, M. H., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D., & Plunkett, K. (1996) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/5929.001.0001 · Cited by 1,511
Johnson, R. (1986) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1986.tb00649.x · Cited by 960
Cited by
Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing
Friederici, A. D. (2002) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01839-8 · Cited by 2,231
The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty
Kaan, E., Harris, A., Gibson, E., & Holcomb, P. (2000) · Language and Cognitive Processes · doi:10.1080/016909600386084 · Cited by 993
Ullman, M. T. (2001) · Bilingualism: Language and Cognition · doi:10.1017/s1366728901000220 · Cited by 803
Brouwer, H., Fitz, H., & Hoeks, J. (2012) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2012.01.055 · Cited by 625
Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Druks, J., Barber, H., & Cappa, S. F. (2011) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.04.007 · Cited by 594
Metadata
- Authors
- Coulson, S., King, J. W., & Kutas, M.
- Venue
- Language and Cognitive Processes
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1998-01
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 21-58
- ISSN
- 0169-0965 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-0732
- OpenAlex
- W2090056988
- Cited by
- 920
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 7.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Expect the Unexpected: Event-related Brain Response to Morphosyntactic Violations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/016909698386582
- The paper
- Coulson, S., King, J. W., & Kutas, M. (1998). Expect the Unexpected: Event-related Brain Response to Morphosyntactic Violations. Language and Cognitive Processes. https://doi.org/10.1080/016909698386582
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.