Series Editor: Li Wei, Centre for Applied Linguistics, University College London
The science of language encompasses a truly interdisciplinary field of research, with a wide range of focuses, approaches, and objectives. While linguistics has its own traditional approaches, a variety of other intellectual disciplines have contributed methodological perspectives that enrich the field as a whole. As a result, linguistics now draws on state‐of‐the‐art work from such fields as psychology, computer science, biology, neuroscience and cognitive science, sociology, music, philosophy, and anthropology.
The interdisciplinary nature of the field presents both challenges and opportunities to students who must understand a variety of evolving research skills and methods. The Guides to Research Methods in Language and Linguistics addresses these skills in a systematic way for advanced students and beginning researchers in language science. The books in this series focus especially on the relationships between theory, methods, and data—the understanding of which is fundamental to the successful completion of research projects and the advancement of knowledge.
Edited by
This edition first published 2018
© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
The right of Annette M. B. de Groot and Peter Hagoort to be identified as the authors of the editorial material in this work has been asserted in accordance with law.
Registered Offices
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
Editorial Office
9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK
For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products visit us at www.wiley.com.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print‐on‐demand. Some content that appears in standard print versions of this book may not be available in other formats.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty
While the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication data applied for
Hardback: 9781119109846
Paperback: 9781119109853
Cover image: (Figure) Designed by Hartebeest, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Cover design by Wiley
| Figure 1.1 | Examples of various infant language habituation tasks |
| Figure 1.2 | Mean looking times across various trial types in Fennell and Byers‐Heinlein (2014) |
| Figure 2.1 | The Intermodal Preferential Looking Paradigm |
| Figure 2.2 | Means of single longest look in seconds to infant‐directed (IDS) and adult‐directed (ADS) speech stimuli |
| Figure 2.3 | The Interactive Intermodal Preferential Looking Paradigm |
| Figure 2.4 | Visual fixation to original label, new label, and recovery trials by condition |
| Figure 2.5 | Eye gaze shifts toward and away from target in looking‐while‐listening task by age |
| Figure 2.6 | The Headturn Preference Procedure |
| Figure 4.1 | Typical eye tracker set up |
| Figure 4.2 | Illustration of the gaze‐contingent moving‐window (top) and boundary (bottom) paradigms |
| Figure 4.3 | Velocity‐based saccade detection |
| Figure 4.4 | Determination of word boundaries with PRAAT software |
| Figure 4.5 | Main effect of eye‐voice span and its interaction with predictability |
| Figure 5.1 | Example of a screen‐based visual world paradigm experimental set up |
| Figure 5.2 | Example visual display modeled after Altmann and Kamide (1999) |
| Figure 5.3 | Timing of target fixations for each trial, for one participant and fixation proportions computed for same data |
| Figure 5.4 | Proportion of fixations over time (from target‐word onset) to target (goat), cohort competitor (goal), and distractor in neutral and constraining verb conditions in Experiment 1 in Dahan and Tanenhaus (2004) |
| Figure 6.1 | An illustration of the trial structure in Meyer and Schvaneveldt (1971) |
| Figure 6.2 | An illustration of the prime‐target pairs used in Glaser and Düngelhoff (1984) |
| Figure 6.3 | Results obtained by Glaser and Düngelhoff (1984) |
| Figure 6.4 | Illustration of trial structures in the masked and unmasked conditions in de Wit and Kinoshita (2015) |
| Figure 7.1 | Example trial in a picture‐matching comprehension priming paradigm |
| Figure 7.2 | Example trial in a picture‐matching and picture‐description production priming paradigm |
| Figure 7.3 | Example trial in a sentence recall production priming paradigm |
| Figure 10.1 | Comparison of cut and break verbs in Chontal, Hindi, and Jalonke |
| Figure 11.1 | The basic architecture of a Simple Recurrent Network (SRN) |
| Figure 11.2 | A sketch of the probabilistic model that incorporates distributional statistics from cross‐situational observation and prosodic and attentional highlights from social gating |
| Figure 11.3 | A sketch of the DevLex‐II model |
| Figure 11.4 | Vocabulary spurt simulated by DevLex‐II (591 target words) |
| Figure 13.1 | Idealized example of an event‐related potential waveform in response to a visual stimulus, with labeled positive and negative peaks |
| Figure 13.2 | Grand average ERPs from three parietal channels, elicited by the final words in the three conditions |
| Figure 13.3 | Simulated EEG data illustrating the difference between ERPs and time‐frequency analyses in their sensitivity to phase‐locked (evoked) and non‐phase‐locked (induced) activity |
| Figure 14.1 | An anatomical scan of the head and the brain (A), and Functional MRI images (B) |
| Figure 14.2 | Example of an idealized BOLD curve, sometimes called the hemodynamic response function (HRF) |
| Figure 14.3 | A statistical map overlaid on an anatomical brain scan |
| Figure 14.4 | Image of a 5‐month‐old infant wearing a fNIRS cap, includinga schematic illustration of the path of light between a source (star) and a detector (circle), through the scalp (dashed line) and cortical tissue (in gray) |
| Figure 14.5 | Sample of signal in fNIRS studies |
| Figure 15.1 | Imaging of an acute patient presenting with anomia following left inferior parietal and frontal lobe stroke |
| Figure 15.2 | Lesion mapping based on T1‐weighted data (A), on a diffusion tractography atlas (B), and an example of extracting tract‐based measurements from tractography (C) |
| Figure 15.3 | Anatomical variability in perisylvian white matter anatomy and its relation to post‐stroke language recovery |
| Figure 16.1 | A schematic illustration showing the steps involved in a VLSM analysis |
| Figure 16.2 | Overlay of patients’ lesions |
| Figure 16.3 | Power analysis map showing the degree of power in our sample, given a medium effect size and alpha set at p < .05 |
| Figure 16.4 | VLSM results showing neural correlates of auditory word recognition with varying levels of correction |
| Figure 17.1 | Transmission of DNA between generations |
| Figure 17.2 | Visualization of Sanger sequencing results |
| Figure 17.3 | Next generation sequencing |
| Figure 17.4 | Visualization of SNP‐chip results |
| Table 1.1 | Mock habituation data from four experiments with looking time as the dependent variable |
| Table 1.2 | Steps in data collection and analyses |
| Table 2.1 | Visual and linguistic stimuli used to teach two novel words in either infant‐directed or adult‐directed speech |
| Table 2.2 | Ten‐ to 12‐month‐old infants saw two types of discrimination trials, one to test for path discrimination and one for actor discrimination |
| Table 3.1 | Overview of instruments/analysis tools for studying vocabulary development in children |
| Table 3.2 | Example transcript from CHILDES |
| Table 4.1 | Definitions of location and duration eye‐tracking measures |
| Table 4.2 | Practical issues related to eye‐tracking during reading |
| Table 7.1 | Example structural alternations studied in structural priming experiments |
| Table 7.2 | Stimulus materials for a hypothetical small clause study |
| Table 7.3 | Hypothetical results for a small clause study |
| Table 8.1 | Questions and assessments from Extracts 8.1 to 8.3 |
| Table 12.1 | Excerpt from the SUBTLEX‐US database for the word “appalled” |
| Table 12.2 | Stimuli used in a semantic priming experiment by de Mornay Davies (1998) |
| Table 17.1 | Example of genotyping chip results for four individuals and five polymorphisms |