Neural Correlates of Processing Syntax in Music and ... - PubMan

Experiment I 100
-1.02 μV, SEM =0.62 μV; left-anterior: M = -0.09 μV, SEM = 0.57 μV; see Figure
9-3). In the paradigm with the supertonics, it was rather bilaterally distributed (leftanterior:
M = -1.12 μV, SEM = 0.54 μV; right-anterior: M = -0.86 μV, SEM = 0.56 μV;
see Figure 9-2). Moreover, the ERAN was most prominent at central electrodes (see
Figure 9-2 and 9-3). In contrast, in older children and adults the difference is strongest
at frontal leads (see, e.g., Experiment III and IV and Koelsch et al., 2000; Koelsch et al.,
2007).
An ANOVA with the within-subject factors chord function (irregular vs. regular chord),
anterior-posterior distribution, and hemisphere and the between subjects factor subgroup
(supertonics vs. Neapolitan sixth chords as irregular chords) was employed to statistically
evaluate these effects. It revealed an main effect of chord function (F(1,67) = 6.67,
p = 0.012), reflecting the difference in the responses to the irregular vs. the regular
chords. Moreover, an interaction of chord function × hemisphere × subgroup was
slightly above the significance threshold (F(1,67) = 3.86, p = 0.054) which likely reflects
the slightly different lateralization of the ERAN in the two experimental paradigms.
Each of the two subgroups was further examined in another ANOVA (with the same
within-subject factors as above). In the group in which the Neapolitan sixth chords were
compared to the tonics, a main effect of chord function (F(1,31) = 3.69, p = 0.064), and an
interaction of chord function × hemisphere (F(1,31) = 3.80, p = 0.060) were slightly
above the significance threshold. In the group in which the supertonics were compared
to the tonics, the ANOVA revealed an main effect of chord function that was approaching
significance (F(1,36) = 3.11, p = 0.086). Presumably, the relative small amplitude size
of the ERAN led to the increase in error probability when the two subgroups were
evaluated separately.
When children that were at-risk for language impairment were compared with children
that were not at-risk, descriptively a difference of the ERAN amplitude was found between
these groups: In the left hemisphere the ERAN amplitude was different for the
two groups (not at-risk: M = -0.51 μV, SEM = 0.53 μV; at-risk: M = 0.29 μV, SEM =
0.79 μV) whereas no difference was found for the right hemisphere (not at-risk: M =
-0.71 μV, SEM = 0.53 μV; at-risk: M = -0.84 μV, SEM = 1.00 μV). This might indicate
deficient neural correlates of syntactic processing in the left hemisphere in the children
that were at-risk for language impairment. However, given the small group size, and the
small amplitude size together with a relatively large standard error of mean these descriptive
results should not be overrated. In accordance, in an ANOVA with the same
within-subject factors as above and risk status as between-subjects factor neither significant
interactions of chord function with risk status nor any other significant main
effect or interactions with chord function were revealed. An interaction of chord func-