Modulation of the ERP components as a function of rule learning performance.

<p>A. Correlation between the mean amplitude of the P2 component at Fz in the third minute of learning (at the 120–220 ms time-window) and the performance on the rule-learning test (N = 20). B. Percentage (± s.e.m.) of correct recognition in the word-learning and rule-learning tests for the groups of good and poor learners (n = 8, in each group). C. ERP averages of the language conditions for each group at a frontal location (Fz), showing the evolution of the differences between groups over the time of exposition (first, second and third minute). While a noticeable increase in the P2 component is shown across time for the good-learners, no modulation is observed for the poor-learners.</p

Materials used for the different artificial languages.

<p>Middle syllables could be combined with the three structures of the language. Each language had a filler version with a random combination of the same syllables. Word, Non-word and Rule-word columns provide examples of test items.</p

Grand average ERPs at frontal (Fz) and central (Cz) electrode locations for language streams.

<p>A. ERP averages comparing the first and second minute of exposition. The ERP signature of the average of words from their onset for the first and second-minute blocks pooled across the four languages is shown. Words in the language streams developed an N400 component during the second minute relative to the first minute. The topography of the difference waveform (subtracting the second from the first minute) showed a central scalp distribution at 50 ms, around the peak of the component (370–420 ms). B. ERP averages comparing the third and first minute. An increase in the amplitude of the P2 component was observed from the third minute. The corresponding difference waveform (third minute minus the first minute) showed a right frontal distribution at 50 ms around the peak of the component (140–190 ms). C. Mean voltage at 50 ms around the peak of the components for the N400 and P2 effects (370–420 and 140–190 ms, respectively) as a function of time at Fz (where both modulations were significant).</p

Illustration of the ERP results for the violation phase.

<p>A. Left panel: ERP averages from the onset of the presentation of words and new words that violated the previously acquired rule (non-words). An early Mismatch Negativity (MMN) appears, which indicates automatic detection of the rule violation. This negativity is followed by a late positive component (LPC) that could be assimilated into a P600 syntactic component. Right panel: ERP averages from the onset of the presentation of words and new words that violated the previously acquired rule (non-words). B. The difference waveform (subtracting non-words from words) has an MMN effect peaking around 190 ms after the onset of the non-word presentation and a fronto-central distribution. The LPC shows a more left lateralised parieto-occipital distribution that peaks around 720 ms after onset.</p

Summary of the ERP statistical results (<i>F</i> values) for the violation phase in the MMN (120–220 ms), the P600 (700–850 ms) components time-windows and for the recognition phase in the N400 (350–800) component time-window.

<p>ML: Midline; TE: Temporal; PS: Parasagittal electrodes. ⁺<i>P</i><0.05; ⁺⁺<i>P</i><0.01; <i>P</i><0.001. Only results with <i>P</i><0.05 are included in the table. NW: Non-words; RW: Rule-words; C: Condition; AP: Anterior-Posterior; H: Hemisphere factors; d.f.: degrees of freedom.</p

Illustration of the ERP results for the recognition phase A.

<p>ERPs averaged from the onset of the presentation of each word in the offline recognition test. While a clear long lasting N400 effect is observed when comparing words and non-words, rule-words did not differ from words. B. Scalp distribution of the N400 effect for non-words compared to words and compared to rule-words. The same topographical distribution of the N400 effect is observed between 350 and 550 ms peaking at fronto-central locations.</p

Summary of the ERP statistical results (<i>F</i> values) for the comparison between groups of the rule (good and poor learners) in the learning phase at the N400 (350–550 ms) and the P2 (120–220 ms) component time-windows.

<p>ML: Midline; TE: Temporal; PS: Parasagittal electrodes. ⁺<i>P</i><0.05; ⁺⁺<i>P</i><0.01. Only results with <i>P</i><0.05 are included in the table. AP: Anterior-Posterior; H : Hemisphere; d.f: degrees of freedom.</p

Effect of syntactic repetition within the heterogeneous condition.

<p>Reaction times (ms) for active and passive sentences preceded by one sentence sharing the same syntactic structure (in white) and by no sentence sharing the same syntactic structure (in grey).</p

Distribution of memory awareness in HD 1 and HD2.

<p>Histograms and density curves represent the distributions of awareness of memory deficits according to the Δ(subjHD-objHD) index in HD1 (red) and HD2 (blue). Negative scores indicate preserved awareness, whereas positive scores indicate impaired awareness. HD1: patients at Stage 1, HD2: patients at Stage 2.</p

Sentence-picture pairs.

<p>Examples of Sentence-Picture pairs for four sentences with the same words.</p