Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: Brain Lang. 2016 May 4;157-158:14–24. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2016.04.010

Figure 1. Schematic representation of a trial in the Matching task.

Figure 1

Note that separate timelines are shown for the video and audio tracks. The video of articulation was congruent in half of all trials (e.g., participants saw the piglet silently articulate “toys” after hearing “toys” at the start of the trial) and incongruent in the other half of trials (e.g., participants saw the piglet silently articulate “bus” after hearing “toys” at the start of the trial). The onset of articulation was used as time 0 for ERP averaging.