MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164437186 · doi:10.1037/cep0000252

Capturing the multi-determined nature of idiom processing using ERPs.

2021· article· en· W3164437186 on OpenAlexaff
Mahsa Morid, Nadia Bachar, Laura Sabourin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMismatch negativityPsychologyP600Stimulus (psychology)ComprehensionNegativity effectElectroencephalographyLexiconMental lexiconCognitive psychologyLinguisticsEvent-related potentialN400Neuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The multi-determined model (Titone & Libben, The Mental Lexicon, 2014, 9, 473) suggests that processing of idioms depends on multiple linguistic factors (e.g., familiarity, literal plausibility, decomposability). According to this model, these sources of information modulate the comprehension of idioms at different time courses. In the current study, we investigated whether these linguistics factors modulate the neurophysiological underpinnings associated with processing of different types of idioms. Adult native speakers of English read sentences that contained idioms with high and low level of familiarity and literal plausibility while their electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded. Event-related potentials data showed that idioms with low level of familiarity elicited larger negativity starting from 300 ms post stimulus onset and lasted for about 200 ms. A similar negativity, but which started later (at around 400 ms post stimulus onset) was also observed for idioms with a low level of literal plausibility. These results are consistent with the multi-determined model of idiom processing indicating the role of these linguistics factors over different time courses. Finally, the observed negativity for low familiar and low literally plausible idioms was greater over the right hemisphere. Accordingly, the possible role of the right hemisphere in processing idioms will be discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentaleSame topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207