Pupil Dilation Response to Prosody and Syntax During Auditory Sentence Processing

Author(s):  
Özgür Aydın ◽  
İpek Pınar Uzun
2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Nella Carminati ◽  
Pia Knoeferle

Background: Prior visual-world research has demonstrated that emotional priming of spoken sentence processing is rapidly modulated by age. Older and younger participants saw two photographs of a positive and of a negative event side-by-side and listened to a spoken sentence about one of these events. Older adults’ fixations to the mentioned (positive) event were enhanced when the still photograph of a previously-inspected positive-valence speaker face was (vs. wasn’t) emotionally congruent with the event/sentence. By contrast, the younger adults exhibited such an enhancement with negative stimuli only. Objective: The first aim of the current study was to assess the replicability of these findings with dynamic face stimuli (unfolding from neutral to happy or sad). A second goal was to assess a key prediction made by socio-emotional selectivity theory, viz. that the positivity effect (a preference for positive information) displayed by older adults involves cognitive effort. Method: We conducted an eye-tracking visual-world experiment. Results: Most priming and age effects, including the positivity effects, replicated. However, against our expectations, the positive gaze preference in older adults did not co-vary with a standard measure of cognitive effort - increased pupil dilation. Instead, pupil size was significantly bigger when (both younger and older) adults processed negative than positive stimuli. Conclusion: These findings are in line with previous research on the relationship between positive gaze preferences and pupil dilation. We discuss both theoretical and methodological implications of these results.


Author(s):  
Margreet Vogelzang ◽  
Christiane M. Thiel ◽  
Stephanie Rosemann ◽  
Jochem W. Rieger ◽  
Esther Ruigendijk

Purpose Adults with mild-to-moderate age-related hearing loss typically exhibit issues with speech understanding, but their processing of syntactically complex sentences is not well understood. We test the hypothesis that listeners with hearing loss' difficulties with comprehension and processing of syntactically complex sentences are due to the processing of degraded input interfering with the successful processing of complex sentences. Method We performed a neuroimaging study with a sentence comprehension task, varying sentence complexity (through subject–object order and verb–arguments order) and cognitive demands (presence or absence of a secondary task) within subjects. Groups of older subjects with hearing loss ( n = 20) and age-matched normal-hearing controls ( n = 20) were tested. Results The comprehension data show effects of syntactic complexity and hearing ability, with normal-hearing controls outperforming listeners with hearing loss, seemingly more so on syntactically complex sentences. The secondary task did not influence off-line comprehension. The imaging data show effects of group, sentence complexity, and task, with listeners with hearing loss showing decreased activation in typical speech processing areas, such as the inferior frontal gyrus and superior temporal gyrus. No interactions between group, sentence complexity, and task were found in the neuroimaging data. Conclusions The results suggest that listeners with hearing loss process speech differently from their normal-hearing peers, possibly due to the increased demands of processing degraded auditory input. Increased cognitive demands by means of a secondary visual shape processing task influence neural sentence processing, but no evidence was found that it does so in a different way for listeners with hearing loss and normal-hearing listeners.


2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Martin-Loeches ◽  
Rasha Abdel-Rahman ◽  
Pilar Casado ◽  
Annette Hohlfeld ◽  
Annekathrin Schacht ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvain Moreno ◽  
Ellen Bialystok ◽  
Zofia Wodniecka ◽  
Claude Alain
Keyword(s):  

1994 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maryellen C. Macdonald ◽  
Sarah P. Schuster

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen A. Kemtes ◽  
Paul J. Schroeder ◽  
Lisa Barnes ◽  
Britania Latronica
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document