Feature type effects in semantic memory:
An event related potentials study

Giuseppe Sartori^a,*, David Polezzi^a,b,
Francesca Mameli ^a,b, Luigi Lombardi ^b

^a Department of General Psychology, University of Padua, Via Venezia, 8, 35100 Padova, Italy
^b Department of Cognitive Sciences and Education, University of Trento, Via Matteo del Ben,
5, 38068 Rovereto (TN), Italy

Received 21 May 2005; received in revised form 15 July 2005; accepted 5 August 2005

Abstract

It is believed that the N400 elicited by concepts belonging to Living things is larger than the N400 to Non-living things. This is considered
as evidence that concepts are organized, in the brain, on the basis of categories. Similarly, differential N400 to Sensory and Non-sensory
semantic features is taken as evidence for a neural organisation of conceptual memory based on semantic features. We conducted a feature-
verification experiment where Living and Non-living concepts are described by Sensory and Non-sensory features and were matched for
Age-of-Acquisition, typicality and familiarity and finally for relevance of semantic features. Relevance is a measure of the contribution of
semantic features to the “core” meaning of a concept. We found that when Relevance is low then the N400 is large. In addition, we found
that when the two categories of Living and Non-living concepts are matched for relevance the seemingly category effect at the neural level
disappeared. Also no difference between Sensory and Non-sensory descriptions was detected when relevance was matched. In sum, N400
does not differ between categories or feature types. Previously reported effects of semantic categories and feature type may have arisen as a
consequence of the differing Relevance of concepts belonging to Living and Non-living categories.

© 2005 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Semantic memory; Semantic relevance; N400

A highly controversial issue in cognitive neuroscience of
semantic memory regards the format of concept represen-
tation. One highly credited theory states that concepts are
represented in the brain on the basis of the content of their
constituent semantic features. In this regard, one of the most
frequently investigated distinctions is that between Sensory
and Non-sensory features. Consider for example the concept
Dog.^1,2 A Sensory feature may be (has four legs). Non-
sensory features may include functional (e.g. (is used for
hunting)), associative (e.g. (likes to chase cats)) and ency-

^* Corresponding author.

E-mail address: [email protected] (G. Sartori).

¹ Concept names are printed in italics, and names of semantic features in
angled brackets.

² Semantic features are also sometimes termed “properties” or “attributes”.
clopaedic features (e.g. (may be one of many breeds )).^3,4
The Sensory/Functional theory, one of the most influential
explanations of semantic memory impairment, is based on the
distinction between Sensory and Non-sensory semantic fea-
tures, and has been used to explain the puzzling phenomenon

³ Throughout this paper, the term “concept” refers to a set of weighted
semantic features; semantic feature is used to describe any type of statement
about the concept (both Sensory and Non-sensory).

⁴ Functional features are defined in different ways. Some authors use this
term for features that directly refer to functions (e.g. (gives milk)) others
denote physically defined features defined by motor properties (e.g. (used to
cut) [7]). Others have defined functional knowledge by exclusion to denote
any property that is not physically defined [21]. Throughout this paper, the
term “Sensory feature” is used to describe semantic features that may be
perceived in any modality, whereas “Non-sensory feature” is used to describe
all other types of semantic features.

0304-3940/$ - see front matter © 2005 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2005.08.015

1   2   3   4   >   >>