Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 14, 2026

Modulating Cognition Using Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Cerebellum
Published on: February 15, 2015
Suppressing contextually irrelevant meanings of homophonic versus heterophonic homographs: A tDCS study targeting
Haim Raviv1, Nira Mashal1, Orna Peleg2
1Faculty of Education, Bar Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel.
Abstract:
Readers frequently encounter homographs (e.g., bank) whose resolution requires selection-suppression processes: selecting the contextually relevant meaning, while suppressing the irrelevant one. In two experiments, we investigated how these processes are modulated by the phonological status of the homograph (homographs with one vs. two possible pronunciations); and what is the involvement of the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG, including Broca's area) in these processes. To these ends, Experiment 1 utilized the context verification task with two types of Hebrew homographs: homophonic (e.g., bank) and heterophonic (e.g., tear). In the task, participants read sentences ending either with a homograph (e.g., bank) or an unambiguous word (e.g., shore). The sentences were biased towards the homograph's subordinate meaning (e.g., The fisherman sat on the bank/shore), and were followed by a target word related to the homograph's dominant meaning (e.g., MONEY). The participants were asked to judge whether the target was related to the overall meaning of the sentence. An ambiguity effect was observed for both types of homographs, reflecting interference from the irrelevant dominant meaning. However, this ambiguity effect was larger for heterophonic than for homophonic homographs, indicating that dominant meanings of heterophonic homographs are more difficult to suppress. Experiment 2 was identical, except that the procedure was coupled with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the LIFG (including Broca's area). We found that stimulating the LIFG abolished the ambiguity effect, but only in the case of heterophonic homographs. Together, these findings highlight the distinction between phonological and semantic levels of selection-suppression processes, and the involvement of the LIFG in the phonological level of these processes.
More Related Videos
12:49Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation tDCS of Wernicke's and Broca's Areas in Studies of Language Learning and Word Acquisition
Published on: July 13, 2019
05:38Interaction between Phonological and Semantic Processes in Visual Word Recognition using Electrophysiology
Published on: June 29, 2021
Related Concept Videos
¹H NMR Chemical Shift Equivalence: Homotopic and Heterotopic Protons
Directional Terms
Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?
There are two ways to indicate that the null hypothesis is not rejected. 'Accept' the null hypothesis and 'fail to...
Components of Language
Language and Cognition
Causes of Similarity-Dissimilarity Effect