Cited by 125Action Observation and SynchronizationNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismFree Will and Agency

N400 ERPs for actions: building meaning in context

Open access
Amoruso, Lucía, Gelormini, Carlos, Aboitiz, Francisco, Alvarez González, Miguel, Manes, Facundo, Cardona, Juan F., Ibanez, Agustín·2013·Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

Abstract

Converging neuroscientific evidence suggests the existence of close links between language and sensorimotor cognition. Accordingly, during the comprehension of meaningful actions, our brain would recruit semantic-related operations similar to those associated with the processing of language information. Consistent with this view, electrophysiological findings show that the N400 component, traditionally linked to the semantic processing of linguistic material, can also be elicited by action-related material. This review outlines recent data from N400 studies that examine the understanding of action events. We focus on three specific domains, including everyday action comprehension, co-speech gesture integration, and the semantics involved in motor planning and execution. Based on the reviewed findings, we suggest that both negativities (the N400 and the action-N400) reflect a common neurocognitive mechanism involved in the construction of meaning through the expectancies created by previous experiences and current contextual information. To shed light on how this process is instantiated in the brain, a testable contextual fronto-temporo-parietal model is proposed.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00057

Cites

151 of 151 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • More negative N450 amplitudes were reported for incongruent set-ups and unexpected actions.

    “More negative N450 amplitudes were reported for incongruent set-ups and unexpected actions (Proverbio & Riva, 2009;Wu & Coulson, 2005; see also Amoruso et al., 2013).”

    From Interplay of self-other distinction and cognitive control mechanisms in a social automatic imitation task: An ERP study (2021) · cites this paper as Amoruso et al., 2013

    The section on semantic integration of speech and co-speech gestures (page unavailable) reports a more negative response to gestures incongruent with a preceding cartoon, peaking around 450 ms; its Figure 3 labels this an N450 effect. The review also describes N400 responses to unexpected action endings, but it does not establish N450 amplitudes for both incongruent set-ups and unexpected actions as phrased. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 157 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Van Petten C. Kutas M. (1990). Interactions between sentence context and word frequency in event-related brain potentials. Mem. Cognit. 18, 380– 393 2381317

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Amoruso, L., Gelormini, C., Aboitiz, F., Alvarez González, M., Manes, F., Cardona, J. F., & Ibanez, A.
Affiliations
  • Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (AR)
  • Instituto de Neurología Cognitiva (AR)
Venue
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Published
2013
Volume
7
Pages
57-57
ISSN
1662-5161 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1970882908
Cited by
125
References
157
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 2
FWCI
15.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (HIR 10-001)
  • Fundación INECO
  • Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (1130920)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
Keywords
N400, action understanding, event understanding, co-speech gestures, motor planning, semantic processing, contextual expectations, meaning-making

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