Cited by 89Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismHemispheric Asymmetry in NeuroscienceReading and Literacy Development

PROCESSING OF SEMANTIC ANOMALY BY RIGHT AND LEFT HEMISPHERES OF COMMISSUROTOMY PATIENTS: EVIDENCE FROM EVENT-RELATED BRAIN POTENTIALS

KUTAS, MARTA, HILLYARD, STEVEN A., GAZZANIGA, MICHAEL S.·1988·Brain

Abstract

The ability of 5 commissurotomized patients to appreciate semantic anomalies presented to their right and left hemispheres was tested using both electrophysiological and behavioural measures. In all cases, the patients heard sentence fragments that were completed either by semantically congruous or incongruous words briefly flashed to the left visual field, right visual field or to both fields simultaneously. A dissociation between behavioural and event-related brain potential (ERP) measures was observed. All 5 patients were able to indicate by a pointing response with greater than chance accuracy whether the terminal word of a sentence made sense (i.e., appropriate for the context) or was nonsensical. This was true regardless of the hemisphere receiving the terminal word. Likewise, all the patients responded to right visual field anomalies with a cerebral potential (N400) that was typically elicited by such words in control subjects. In contrast, only those 2 patients who developed an overt speech capability under the control of the right hemisphere produced N400 waves in response to left visual field anomalies. These findings were interpreted as suggesting possible relationships within language generation and semantic priming.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/brain/111.3.553

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
KUTAS, M., HILLYARD, S. A., & GAZZANIGA, M. S.
Affiliations
Cornell University (US)
Venue
Brain
Published
1988
Volume
111
Issue
3
Pages
553-576
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W2120687313
Cited by
89
References
2
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 2
FWCI
3.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH 00322)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS17778)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD-22614)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hemispheric Asymmetry in Neuroscience
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
semantic anomalies, hemispheric lateralization, right hemisphere language, left hemisphere language, N400, event-related potentials, semantic priming, sentence comprehension, visual field presentation, pointing responses, language generation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Behavior, Brain, Epilepsy, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Language, Male, Seizures, Thinking

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