eLife (Apr 2018)

Large-scale replication study reveals a limit on probabilistic prediction in language comprehension

  • Mante S Nieuwland,
  • Stephen Politzer-Ahles,
  • Evelien Heyselaar,
  • Katrien Segaert,
  • Emily Darley,
  • Nina Kazanina,
  • Sarah Von Grebmer Zu Wolfsthurn,
  • Federica Bartolozzi,
  • Vita Kogan,
  • Aine Ito,
  • Diane Mézière,
  • Dale J Barr,
  • Guillaume A Rousselet,
  • Heather J Ferguson,
  • Simon Busch-Moreno,
  • Xiao Fu,
  • Jyrki Tuomainen,
  • Eugenia Kulakova,
  • E Matthew Husband,
  • David I Donaldson,
  • Zdenko Kohút,
  • Shirley-Ann Rueschemeyer,
  • Falk Huettig

DOI
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.33468
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 7

Abstract

Read online

Do people routinely pre-activate the meaning and even the phonological form of upcoming words? The most acclaimed evidence for phonological prediction comes from a 2005 Nature Neuroscience publication by DeLong, Urbach and Kutas, who observed a graded modulation of electrical brain potentials (N400) to nouns and preceding articles by the probability that people use a word to continue the sentence fragment (‘cloze’). In our direct replication study spanning 9 laboratories (N=334), pre-registered replication-analyses and exploratory Bayes factor analyses successfully replicated the noun-results but, crucially, not the article-results. Pre-registered single-trial analyses also yielded a statistically significant effect for the nouns but not the articles. Exploratory Bayesian single-trial analyses showed that the article-effect may be non-zero but is likely far smaller than originally reported and too small to observe without very large sample sizes. Our results do not support the view that readers routinely pre-activate the phonological form of predictable words.

Keywords