iv In the present study we used two experiments to test whether readers use integrative (retrospective), predictive (prospective), or both processes when reading words across a sentence boundary. We used Experiment 1 to determine whether prediction and integration could be measured as distinct processes. Response times (RTs) to determining whether probe words occurred in a previous sentence were measured. Critical probes were either high or low predictable words, given a context sentence. Both

more »

... ord types were easy to integrate, fitting well with the previous sentence. Results showed high predictable words had longer RTs than low predictable words, demonstrating that prediction and integration are distinct processes. In Experiment 2 we aimed to determine which processes were used when reading across a sentence boundary using event-related potentials (ERPs). The ERP component of interest was the N400, an indicator of semantic fit. We measured processing differences for high and low predictable words that were matched for integrability in sentence pairs. In a control condition, words were unpredictable and difficult to integrate. There was no difference in word processing (indicated by N400 amplitudes) between high and low predictable words across a sentence boundary. However, both word types were easier to process (reduced N400s) than control conditions. Findings show semantic overlap from word-and sentence-level activations facilitate integration in cross-sentence boundary reading.