The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Interplay between Syntax and Semantics during Sentence Comprehension: ERP Effects of Combining Syntactic and Semantic Violations
Open accessAbstract
This study investigated the effects of combined semantic and syntactic violations in relation to the effects of single semantic and single syntactic violations on language-related event-related brain potential (ERP) effects (N400 and P600/ SPS). Syntactic violations consisted of a mismatch in grammatical gender or number features of the definite article and the noun in sentence-internal or sentence-final noun phrases (NPs). Semantic violations consisted of semantically implausible adjective–noun combinations in the same NPs. Combined syntactic and semantic violations were a summation of these two respective violation types. ERPs were recorded while subjects read the sentences with the different types of violations and the correct control sentences. ERP effects were computed relative to ERPs elicited by the sentence-internal or sentence-final nouns. The size of the N400 effect to the semantic violation was increased by an additional syntactic violation (the syntactic boost). In contrast, the size of the P600/ SPS to the syntactic violation was not affected by an additional semantic violation. This suggests that in the absence of syntactic ambiguity, the assignment of syntactic structure is independent of semantic context. However, semantic integration is influenced by syntactic processing. In the sentence-final position, additional global processing consequences were obtained as a result of earlier violations in the sentence. The resulting increase in the N400 amplitude to sentence-final words was independent of the nature of the violation. A speeded anomaly detection task revealed that it takes substantially longer to detect semantic than syntactic anomalies. These results are discussed in relation to the latency and processing characteristics of the N400 and P600/SPS effects. Overall, the results reveal an asymmetry in the interplay between syntax and semantics during on-line sentence comprehension.
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
Statistical principles in experimental design.
Winer, B. J. (1962) · McGraw-Hill Book Company · doi:10.1037/11774-000 · Cited by 26,755
The ten-twenty electrode system of the international federation
Jasper, H. H. (1958) · Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology · Cited by 6,567
Reading Senseless Sentences: Brain Potentials Reflect Semantic Incongruity
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7350657 · Cited by 4,888
Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution
Jackendoff, R. S. (2002) · Cited by 1,858
Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly
Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1992) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/0749-596x(92)90039-z · Cited by 1,856
Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology
(1994) · Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/0013-4694(94)90118-x · Cited by 1,759
The syntactic positive shift (sps) as an erp measure of syntactic processing
Hagoort, P., Brown, C., & Groothusen, J. (1993) · Language and Cognitive Processes · doi:10.1080/01690969308407585 · Cited by 1,260
Self-citationSemantic Influences On Parsing: Use of Thematic Role Information in Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution
Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Garnsey, S. M. (1994) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1006/jmla.1994.1014 · Cited by 1,175
Psychophysiology: Systems, Processes, and Applications
Muncy, J. A., Coles, M. G. H., Donchin, E., & Porges, S. W. (1987) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3151514 · Cited by 1,014
Interaction with context during human sentence processing
Altmann, G., & Steedman, M. (1988) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(88)90020-0 · Cited by 1,000
Cited by
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.131123 · Cited by 4,377
Neural mechanisms of language comprehension: Challenges to syntax
Kuperberg, G. R. (2007) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.12.063 · Cited by 1,041
Anticipating Upcoming Words in Discourse: Evidence From ERPs and Reading Times.
Van Berkum, J. J. A., Brown, C. M., Zwitserlood, P., Kooijman, V., & Hagoort, P. (2005) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.31.3.443 · Cited by 930
Self-citationWicha, N. Y. Y., Moreno, E. M., & Kutas, M. (2004) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/0898929041920487 · Cited by 516
Age of acquisition: Its neural and computational mechanisms.
Hernandez, A. E., & Li, P. (2007) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.638 · Cited by 324
Metadata
- Authors
- Hagoort, P.
- Venue
- Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 2003-08
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 883-899
- ISSN
- 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
- 1530-8898
- OpenAlex
- W2145679566
- Cited by
- 437
- References
- 50
- FWCI
- 5.82
- 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: Interplay between Syntax and Semantics during Sentence Comprehension: ERP Effects of Combining Syntactic and Semantic Violations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/089892903322370807
- The paper
- Hagoort, P. (2003). Interplay between Syntax and Semantics during Sentence Comprehension: ERP Effects of Combining Syntactic and Semantic Violations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892903322370807
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.
