Cognitive control mediates age-related changes in flexible anticipatory processing during listening comprehension.
Age Factors
Aged
Aging
/ physiology
Auditory Perception
/ physiology
Brain Mapping
/ methods
Cognition
/ physiology
Communication
Comprehension
/ physiology
Cooperative Behavior
Cues
Electroencephalography
Evoked Potentials
/ physiology
Female
Humans
Language
Linguistics
Male
Middle Aged
Speech
/ physiology
Speech Perception
/ physiology
Young Adult
Aging
Cognitive control
Event-related potentials
Language
Prediction
Journal
Brain research
ISSN: 1872-6240
Titre abrégé: Brain Res
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 0045503
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 10 2021
01 10 2021
Historique:
received:
31
12
2020
revised:
16
05
2021
accepted:
25
06
2021
pubmed:
4
7
2021
medline:
19
3
2022
entrez:
3
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Effective listening comprehension not only requires processing local linguistic input, but also necessitates incorporating contextual cues available in the global communicative environment. Local sentence processing can be facilitated by pre-activation of likely upcoming input, or predictive processing. Recent evidence suggests that young adults can flexibly adapt local predictive processes based on cues provided by the global communicative environment, such as the reliability of specific speakers. Whether older comprehenders can also flexibly adapt to global contextual cues is currently unknown. Moreover, it is unclear whether the underlying mechanisms supporting local predictive processing differ from those supporting adaptation to global contextual cues. Critically, it is unclear whether these mechanisms change as a function of typical aging. We examined the flexibility of prediction in young and older adults by presenting sentences from speakers whose utterances were typically more or less predictable (i.e., reliable speakers who produced expected words 80% of the time, versus unreliable speakers who produced expected words 20% of the time). For young listeners, global speaker reliability cues modulated neural effects of local predictability on the N400. In contrast, older adults, on average, did not show global modulation of local processing. Importantly, however, cognitive control (i.e., Stroop interference effects) mediated age-related reductions in sensitivity to the reliability of the speaker. Both young and older adults with high cognitive control showed greater N400 effects of predictability during sentences produced by a reliable speaker, suggesting that cognitive control is required to regulate the strength of top-down predictions based on global contextual information. Critically, cognitive control predicted sensitivity to global speaker-specific information but not local predictability cues, suggesting that predictive processing in local sentence contexts may be supported by separable neural mechanisms from adaptation of prediction as a function of global context. These results have important implications for interpreting age-related change in predictive processing, and for drawing more generalized conclusions regarding domain-general versus language-specific accounts of prediction.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34216583
pii: S0006-8993(21)00430-3
doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2021.147573
pmc: PMC8403152
mid: NIHMS1721640
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
147573Subventions
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : R56 AG053346
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Références
Psychophysiology. 2007 Jul;44(4):491-505
pubmed: 17521377
Psychol Aging. 2012 Dec;27(4):975-88
pubmed: 22775363
Psychophysiology. 2012 Jun;49(6):770-85
pubmed: 22469362
Neuropsychology. 2008 Jul;22(4):508-22
pubmed: 18590362
Brain Res. 2007 May 18;1146:23-49
pubmed: 17400197
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1991 Jan;17(1):163-9
pubmed: 1826730
Cognition. 2019 Jun;187:10-20
pubmed: 30797099
Lang Cogn Process. 2012 Jun 1;27(5):698-733
pubmed: 23002319
Trends Cogn Sci. 2001 Nov 1;5(11):479-486
pubmed: 11684480
Psychol Sci. 2016 Apr;27(4):572-82
pubmed: 26957521
Psychophysiology. 2002 Mar;39(2):133-46
pubmed: 12212662
Cognition. 2008 Mar;106(3):1126-77
pubmed: 17662975
Cogn Psychol. 2003 Sep;47(2):204-38
pubmed: 12948518
Psychol Bull. 1991 Mar;109(2):163-203
pubmed: 2034749
Cognition. 2015 Mar;136:135-49
pubmed: 25497522
Lang Cogn Neurosci. 2016;31(1):32-59
pubmed: 27135040
Cognition. 2018 Jul;176:87-106
pubmed: 29549762
Front Psychol. 2013 Nov 07;4:817
pubmed: 24223564
Neuropsychologia. 2018 Aug;117:135-147
pubmed: 29852201
J Cogn Neurosci. 2009 Dec;21(12):2434-44
pubmed: 19199402
J Cogn Neurosci. 2008 Apr;20(4):580-91
pubmed: 18052777
Front Psychol. 2013 Feb 13;4:60
pubmed: 23407753
Int J Psychophysiol. 2012 Feb;83(2):176-90
pubmed: 22019481
Neuropsychologia. 2020 Feb 17;138:107307
pubmed: 31874149
Brain Lang. 2007 Mar;100(3):257-61
pubmed: 16919324
Brain Imaging Behav. 2015 Sep;9(3):609-18
pubmed: 25280971
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2013 Nov;39(6):1823-41
pubmed: 23687920
Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Dec;23(6):1942-1953
pubmed: 27230894
J Neurosci. 2020 Sep 16;40(38):7300-7310
pubmed: 32817245
Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2020 Dec;29(6):575-582
pubmed: 33584021
Cogn Sci. 2009 Jun;33(4):583-609
pubmed: 20396405
Neuroimage. 2004 Jan;21(1):192-200
pubmed: 14741656
Brain Res. 2015 Nov 11;1626:118-35
pubmed: 25708148
J Neurosci. 2013 Sep 25;33(39):15578-87
pubmed: 24068824
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2005 May;31(3):443-67
pubmed: 15910130
PLoS One. 2014 May 20;9(5):e96840
pubmed: 24844290
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2019 Jan;96:367-400
pubmed: 30621862
Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn. 2007 Mar;14(2):155-67
pubmed: 17364378
Cogn Sci. 2006 Mar 4;30(2):311-45
pubmed: 21702817
Memory. 2005 Apr-May;13(3-4):403-13
pubmed: 15952262
Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn. 2012;19(1-2):122-49
pubmed: 22149149
Brain Res. 2018 Jul 15;1691:34-43
pubmed: 29679544
J Cogn Neurosci. 2013 Mar;25(3):484-502
pubmed: 23163410
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2012 Jan;38(1):178-86
pubmed: 21767066
Psychol Rev. 1996 Jul;103(3):403-28
pubmed: 8759042
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2014;67(9):1842-62
pubmed: 24443921
Annu Rev Psychol. 2011;62:621-47
pubmed: 20809790
J Mem Lang. 2021 Feb;116:
pubmed: 33100508
Neuropsychologia. 2019 Dec;135:107225
pubmed: 31605686
Trends Cogn Sci. 2019 Jul;23(7):547-559
pubmed: 31174975
Brain Cogn. 2002 Aug;49(3):277-96
pubmed: 12139955
Schizophr Res Treatment. 2012;2012:484502
pubmed: 22970364
J Cogn Neurosci. 2010 Dec;22(12):2886-98
pubmed: 19929760
Brain Res. 2018 May 15;1687:117-128
pubmed: 29462609
Neuropsychologia. 2020 Jan;136:107258
pubmed: 31730774
Cereb Cortex Commun. 2020 May 29;1(1):tgaa021
pubmed: 34296098
Int J Audiol. 2003 Jul;42 Suppl 2:2S26-32
pubmed: 12918626
Behav Brain Sci. 2013 Jun;36(3):181-204
pubmed: 23663408
J Neurosci. 2019 Jan 16;39(3):519-527
pubmed: 30459221
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2005 Sep;5(3):263-81
pubmed: 16396089
Neuropsychologia. 2012 Sep;50(11):2659-68
pubmed: 22842106
Psychol Aging. 1994 Dec;9(4):491-512
pubmed: 7893421
Front Neurosci. 2019 Sep 13;13:857
pubmed: 31572106
J Cogn Neurosci. 2015 Dec;27(12):2309-23
pubmed: 26401815
Brain Res. 2008 Apr 8;1203:103-15
pubmed: 18313650
Psychophysiology. 1995 May;32(3):215-29
pubmed: 7784530
Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1998 Sep;108(5):456-71
pubmed: 9780016
Neurosci Lett. 2003 Mar 27;339(3):191-4
pubmed: 12633885
Psychophysiology. 2005 Mar;42(2):133-41
pubmed: 15787850
J Neurosci. 2020 Jun 3;40(23):4536-4550
pubmed: 32317387
Brain Lang. 2010 Dec;115(3):149-61
pubmed: 20728207
Mol Psychiatry. 2012 May;17(5):471, 549-58
pubmed: 21727896
Brain Lang. 2012 Jun;121(3):226-39
pubmed: 22406351
BMC Neurosci. 2014 Jan 08;15:7
pubmed: 24401034