mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Are words equally surprising in audio and audio-visual comprehension?

arXiv 2307.07277 ↗First posted 14 Jul 2023cs.CLcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We report a controlled study investigating the effect of visual information (i.e., seeing the speaker) on spoken language comprehension. We compare the ERP signature (N400) associated with each word in audio-only and audio-visual presentations of the same verbal stimuli. We assess the extent to which surprisal measures (which quantify the predictability of words in their lexical context) are generated on the basis of different types of language models (specifically n-gram and Transformer models) that predict N400 responses for each word. Our results indicate that cognitive effort differs significantly between multimodal and unimodal settings. In addition, our findings suggest that while Transformer-based models, which have access to a larger lexical context, provide a better fit in the audio-only setting, 2-gram language models are more effective in the multimodal setting. This highlights the significant impact of local lexical context on cognitive processing in a multimodal environment.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Jul 2023.

Builds on

5 of 44 references.

References · 5

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2021Revisiting the Uniform Information Density Hypothesiscited by 63
  3. 2020Human Sentence Processing: Recurrence or Attention?cited by 51
  4. 2020How well does surprisal explain N400 amplitude under different experimental conditions?cited by 18
  5. 2021Different kinds of cognitive plausibility: why are transformers better than RNNs at predicting N400 amplitude?cited by 14

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.