Talk:Psycholinguistics/Semantics in the Brain


 * I did edit the chapter as I reviewed it, If whoever is marking the edits would like to see the comments, it is in a word file and I have attached it to the assignment submission. I will send it to the author of the chapter, I simply did not feel comfortable changing someones hard work without their knowledge/permission.

Semantics in the Brain
As I was reading the introduction of semantics in the brain I found myself very intrigued in the topic due to the presentation and style of writing used. I began wondering how processing of language occurs, and where and what functions specific areas perform. I was also interested in understanding the connections between involved areas and how the synaptic connections work. Overall, the introduction did a wonderful job of making the reader interested and gave a good basis of what will be discussed in the chapter. I did make a few comments but it was more based on grammar than content, the content itself leaves you well informed about what you will be reading. The biggest suggestion I have to make is to not start a sentence with a referent such as “it” although in general people will know what you are referring to it is not proper grammar and requires longer processing by the reader.

Distributed Networks
The distributed networks section does a good job at demonstrating how processing generally occurs in the brain, with certain areas having higher activation for certain things compared to others. As a reader of a psycholinguistics chapter I was uncertain as to why object form and motion was used to describe distributed networks as opposed to a seemingly more relevant topic. However, if there has been a fair bit of research on these topics I can understand why it was used. If this is the case, I would suggest saying why you selected those topics. I was interested by the difference in activation for unique vs. generic items. I find it fascinating to think that our brain, and neural circuits can link past knowledge and memories to a presented item such as a person’s dog vs. a generic dog. The ability of the brain to do this is essential yet how it does so still eludes researchers around the world. The opening sentence did a wonderful job at getting the reader’s attention and really other than a few word choice disagreements the only comment I would make is to fully explain everything because one has to assume that a person reading the chapter may have no previous experience with the topic or even research for that matter. Overall, the information was presented in a clean, well-written manner that was stimulating to me as a reader.

Neural Network “Hub”
The neural network “Hub” section is a good introduction to the concept of a neural network hub and the controversy surrounding it. I was unaware of the contradictory results from neuroimaging such as those of PET vs fMRI and found it very interesting to learn about how much technology can influence opinions and results. However, a few suggestions is I would remove the direct quote in the introduction, I believe it was suggested that we not use direct quotes and paraphrase instead. Also the sentence “This means that due to a lack of ROI ATL activation may have been overlooked or unnoticed due to insensitive neuroimaging studies (Visser et al., 2010)” does not make sense, I would reword or check syntax

Semantic Priming
The semantic priming section was really well explained. Not only was semantic priming explained but also one of the main tasks that use semantic priming (the lexical decision task) as well. It was an overall goo account of the function and use of semantic priming.

Formal thought disorder (FTD)
I was unaware of FTD in general and its prevalence in schizophrenic patients; therefore, I required a good introduction to the disorder. The section really explained what the disorder is, its connections and where it is thought to have an impact in the brain. My only critique is that in the conclusion the far-spreading hypothesis was introduced with no previous mention of it, therefore, I believe it should be mentioned prior to the conclusion with a brief explanation of what it is.

Overall, the semantics in the brain chapter was really well written and informative. There was evidence of ample research and it was organized in a very orderly manner with the presentation of the basics preceding the more advanced topics such as disorders. I really found the information quite interesting and look forward to reading the final product.

Answers to Part I

 * 1) Neurological
 * 2) Schizophrenia
 * 3) Anterior
 * 4) False
 * 5) Movement
 * 6) Motor
 * 7) Greater
 * 8) Lexical
 * 9) Thought
 * 10) Priming