Electrophysiological correlates of emotional meaning in context in relation to facets of schizotypal personality traits: A dimensional study.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate the neurocognitive processes mediating the processing of emotional information during the integration of contextual and social information in a schizotypal population. METHODS: One hundred and thirty-one healthy participants were evaluated using the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire and event-related potentials were recorded during a linguistic task in which participants read sentence pairs describing short social situations to themselves. The first sentence implicitly conveyed the positive or negative emotional state of a character. The second sentence was emotionally congruent or incongruent with the first sentence. RESULTS: Across our overall sample, our results revealed a greater N400 effect at right sites than left sites, whereas the late positive component effect was only observed at left sites. Concerning the correlation results, we observed a negative link between positive and global schizotypy and N400 modulation in response to congruent targets for positive context sentences. Results also showed a positive correlation between negative schizotypy and late positive component modulation in response to congruent targets for negative context sentences. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the different facets of the schizotypal personality traits influenced the integration of emotional context at the level of both early and later-mobilized neurocognitive processes.

Processing Verb Meanings and the Declarative/Procedural Model: A Developmental Study.

According to the Declarative/Procedural Model, the lexicon depends on declarative memory while grammar relies on procedural memory. Furthermore, procedural memory underlies the sequential processing of language. Thus, this system is important for predicting the next item in a sentence. Verb processing represents a good candidate to test this assumption. Semantic representations of verbs include information about the protagonists in the situations they refer to. This semantic knowledge is acquired implicitly and used during verb processing, such that the processing of a verb preactivates its typical patients (e.g., the window for break). Thus, determining how the patient typicality effect appears during children's cognitive development could provide evidence about the memory system that is dedicated to this effect. Two studies are presented in which French children aged 6-10 and adults made grammaticality judgments on 80 auditorily presented sentences. In Experiment 1, the verb was followed by a typical patient or by a less typical patient. In Experiment 2, grammatical sentences were constructed such that the verb was followed either by a typical patient or by a noun that could not be a patient of that verb. The typicality effect occurs in younger children and is interpreted in terms of developmental invariance. We suggest that this effect may depend on procedural memory, in line with studies that showed that meaning is necessary to allow procedural memory to learn the sequence of words in a sentence.

[The clouds are a flock of sheep: at what age do children understand that there are no sheep in the sky?]. / Les nuages sont un troupeau de moutons: a quel âge les enfants comprennent-ils qu'il n'y pas de moutons dans le ciel?

This study examined the evolution of metaphor understanding in 4- to 7-year-old children. In Experiment 1, children listened to metaphoric and literal statements that were preceded by a context, and then had to choose among three proposed interpretations (literal, contextual, and correct for metaphors; one correct and two erroneous for literal statements), which one corresponded to the statement. Results showed that, between 4 and 7, children improved at choosing the correct interpretation only for metaphors, and that they frequently chose contextual interpretations. The metaphor-specific improvement might be explained in terms of a gain in cognitive flexibility, since for these statements, three acceptable interpretations were proposed compared to only one for literal statements. In Experiment 2, for all statements, children had to choose between three proposed interpretations, one correct and two erroneous. The difference between metaphors and literal statements was replicated. Metaphor understanding thus evolves between 4 and 7; depending on their age, children use the context or perform a semantic analysis of the words composing the statements.