Hosemann, Jana

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","2224"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","11"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Neuropsychologia"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","2237"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","51"],["dc.contributor.author","Hosemann, Jana"],["dc.contributor.author","Herrmann, Annika"],["dc.contributor.author","Steinbach, Markus"],["dc.contributor.author","Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Ina"],["dc.contributor.author","Schlesewsky, Matthias"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T09:20:10Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T09:20:10Z"],["dc.date.issued","2013"],["dc.description.abstract","Models of language processing in the human brain often emphasize the prediction of upcoming input for example in order to explain the rapidity of language understanding. However, the precise mechanisms of prediction are still poorly understood. Forward models, which draw upon the language production system to set up expectations during comprehension, provide a promising approach in this regard. Here, we present an event-related potential (ERP) study on German Sign Language (DGS) which tested the hypotheses of a forward model perspective on prediction. Sign languages involve relatively long transition phases between one sign and the next, which should be anticipated as part of a forward model-based prediction even though they are semantically empty. Native speakers of DGS watched videos of naturally signed DGS sentences which either ended with an expected or a (semantically) unexpected sign. Unexpected signs engendered a biphasic N400 late positivity pattern. Crucially, N400 onset preceded critical sign onset and was thus clearly elicited by properties of the transition phase. The comprehension system thereby clearly anticipated modality-specific information about the realization of the predicted semantic item. These results provide strong converging support for the application of forward models in language comprehension. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved."],["dc.description.sponsorship","University of Mainz"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.07.013"],["dc.identifier.isi","000328005500018"],["dc.identifier.pmid","23896445"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/28817"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.relation.eissn","0028-3932"],["dc.relation.issn","1873-3514"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Abteilung Germanistische Linguistik"],["dc.title","Lexical prediction via forward models: N400 evidence from German Sign Language"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","57"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Glossa (London)"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","5"],["dc.contributor.author","Hosemann, Jana"],["dc.contributor.author","Mani, Nivedita"],["dc.contributor.author","Herrmann, Annika"],["dc.contributor.author","Steinbach, Markus"],["dc.contributor.author","Altvater-Mackensen, Nicole"],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-04-14T08:24:59Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-04-14T08:24:59Z"],["dc.date.issued","2020"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.5334/gjgl.1014"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/81486"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-399"],["dc.relation.eissn","2397-1835"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Abteilung Germanistische Linguistik"],["dc.title","Signs activate their written word translation in deaf adults: An ERP study on cross-modal co-activation in German Sign Language"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","e56178"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","2"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","PLoS ONE"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","8"],["dc.contributor.author","Kretzschmar, Franziska"],["dc.contributor.author","Pleimling, Dominique"],["dc.contributor.author","Hosemann, Jana"],["dc.contributor.author","Fuessel, Stephan"],["dc.contributor.author","Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Ina"],["dc.contributor.author","Schlesewsky, Matthias"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T09:28:15Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T09:28:15Z"],["dc.date.issued","2013"],["dc.description.abstract","In the rapidly changing circumstances of our increasingly digital world, reading is also becoming an increasingly digital experience: electronic books (e-books) are now outselling print books in the United States and the United Kingdom. Nevertheless, many readers still view e-books as less readable than print books. The present study thus used combined EEG and eyetracking measures in order to test whether reading from digital media requires higher cognitive effort than reading conventional books. Young and elderly adults read short texts on three different reading devices: a paper page, an e-reader and a tablet computer and answered comprehension questions about them while their eye movements and EEG were recorded. The results of a debriefing questionnaire replicated previous findings in that participants overwhelmingly chose the paper page over the two electronic devices as their preferred reading medium. Online measures, by contrast, showed shorter mean fixation durations and lower EEG theta band voltage density - known to covary with memory encoding and retrieval - for the older adults when reading from a tablet computer in comparison to the other two devices. Young adults showed comparable fixation durations and theta activity for all three devices. Comprehension accuracy did not differ across the three media for either group. We argue that these results can be explained in terms of the better text discriminability (higher contrast) produced by the backlit display of the tablet computer. Contrast sensitivity decreases with age and degraded contrast conditions lead to longer reading times, thus supporting the conclusion that older readers may benefit particularly from the enhanced contrast of the tablet. Our findings thus indicate that people's subjective evaluation of digital reading media must be dissociated from the cognitive and neural effort expended in online information processing while reading from such devices."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1371/journal.pone.0056178"],["dc.identifier.isi","000315153400211"],["dc.identifier.pmid","23405265"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/8559"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/30729"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Public Library Science"],["dc.relation.issn","1932-6203"],["dc.rights","CC BY 2.5"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5"],["dc.title","Subjective Impressions Do Not Mirror Online Reading Effort: Concurrent EEG-Eyetracking Evidence from the Reading of Books and Digital Media"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","1107"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","9"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Language, Cognition and Neuroscience"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","1127"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","33"],["dc.contributor.author","Hosemann, Jana"],["dc.contributor.author","Herrmann, Annika"],["dc.contributor.author","Sennhenn-Reulen, Holger"],["dc.contributor.author","Schlesewsky, Matthias"],["dc.contributor.author","Steinbach, Markus"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-25T15:43:42Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-25T15:43:42Z"],["dc.date.issued","2018"],["dc.description.abstract","Previous studies on agreement violation in sign languages report neurophysiological responses similar to those observed for spoken languages. In contrast, the two current event-related potential studies (ERP) on agreement violations in German Sign Language sentences present results that allow for an alternative explanation. In experiment A, we investigated the processing of agreement verbs ending in an unspecified location different to the location associated with the referent. Incorrect agreement verbs engendered a posterior positivity effect (220–570 ms post nonmanual cues) and a left anterior effect (300–600 ms post the subsequent sign onset). In experiment B, we investigated a violation of morphologically modified plain verbs. Incorrect plain verbs, articulated to express third person object agreement, engendered a broadly distributed positivity effect (420–730 ms post mismatch onset). We discuss the results under the perspective of enhanced costs for context updating, and argue that sign language agreement is based on phonological and pragmatic principles."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1080/23273798.2018.1465986"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/62071"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.relation.issn","2327-3798"],["dc.relation.issn","2327-3801"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Abteilung Germanistische Linguistik"],["dc.title","Agreement or no agreement. ERP correlates of verb agreement violation in German Sign Language"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]