The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
When syntax meets semantics
Abstract
Three experiments concerning the processing of syntactic and semantic violations were conducted. Event related potentials (ERPs) showed that semantic violations elicited an N400 response, whereas syntactic violations elicited two early negativities (150 and 350 ms) and a P600 response. No interaction between the semantic and early syntactic ERP effects was found sentence complexity and violation probability (25% vs 75%) affected only the P600 and not the early negativities. The probability effect was taken as evidence that the P600 resembles the P3B, The temporal order of word processing in a sentence as suggested by the data was such that a more automatic syntactic analysis was performed (earlier syntactic‐related negativities) in parallel with a semantic analysis 9N400), after which a syntactic reanalysis was performed (P600). A reanalysis interpretation of the P600 could explain why the extent of the reanalysis differed with syntactic complexity and probability of ungrammaticality.
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
Fodor, J. A. (1983) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4737.001.0001 · Cited by 7,734
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
MANOVA method for analyzing repeated measures designs: An extensive primer.
O'Brien, R. G., & Kaiser, M. K. (1985) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.97.2.316 · Cited by 1,148
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
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
The linguistic processes underlying the P600
Gouvea, A. C., Phillips, C., Kazanina, N., & Poeppel, D. (2010) · Language and Cognitive Processes · doi:10.1080/01690960902965951 · Cited by 344
Metadata
- Authors
- GUNTER, T. C., STOWE, L. A., & MULDER, G.
- Venue
- Psychophysiology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1997-11
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 660-676
- ISSN
- 0048-5772 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8986
- OpenAlex
- W2105623576
- Cited by
- 422
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 4.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: When syntax meets semantics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1997.tb02142.x
- The paper
- GUNTER, T. C., STOWE, L. A., & MULDER, G. (1997). When syntax meets semantics. Psychophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1997.tb02142.x
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.
