Table 1.
Proficiency and age information about the L2 learners (ungrouped data; N = 78).
Table 2.
Sample stimuli for the experimental conditions.
Fig 1.
Electrode layout.
Table 3.
Zero-order correlations between L2 proficiency and experiential measures (Proficiency Test Score, instruction, Months Abroad) and measures of sensitivity to agreement (D-prime Score, ERP magnitude).
Fig 2.
Relationship between the learners’ overall proficiency in the L2 (Proficiency Test Score) and accuracy in the grammaticality judgment task (D-Prime Score) according to agreement type.
(A) Correlation between Proficiency Test Score and D-Prime Score for Within-Phrase Number. (B) Correlation between Proficiency Test Score and D-Prime Score for Within-Phrase Gender. (C) Correlation between Proficiency Test Score and D-Prime Score for Across-Phrase Number. (D) Correlation between Proficiency Test Score and D-Prime Score for Across-Phrase Gender.
Fig 3.
Relationship between length of immersion in Spanish-speaking countries (Months Abroad) and P600 magnitude for gender violations realized within the phrase (calculated for the Central-Posterior region).
Fig 4.
Relationship between the learners’ accuracy in the grammaticality judgment task (D-Prime Score) and P600 magnitude for each agreement type and syntactic context.
(A) Correlation between D-Prime Score and P600 Magnitude for Within-Phrase Number. (B) Correlation between D-Prime Score and P600 Magnitude for Within-Phrase Gender. (C) Correlation between D-Prime Score and P600 Magnitude for Across-Phrase Number. (D) Correlation between D-Prime Score and P600 Magnitude for Across-Phrase Gender.
Table 4.
Proficiency and age information about the Highest- and Lowest-Proficiency groups.
Table 5.
Accuracy scores (percentage of correct responses) in the grammaticality judgment task and D-Prime Scores for the Lowest- and Highest-proficiency groups.
Fig 5.
Grand average ERPs for the within-phrase agreement conditions in the Highest- and Lowest-Proficiency groups: Grammatical, number violation, and gender violation.
ERPs are plotted for a representative electrode within each region of interest.
Fig 6.
Grand average ERPs for the across-phrase agreement conditions in the Highest- and Lowest-Proficiency groups: Grammatical, number violation, and gender violation.
ERPs are plotted for a representative electrode within each region of interest.
Table 6.
Results of the separate ANOVAs conducted in the 250-400ms time window for the Highest- and Lowest-Proficiency groups.
Only significant and marginal results are reported. Where applicable, degrees of freedom were adjusted using the Greenhouse-Geisser correction.
Table 7.
Results of the separate ANOVAs conducted in the 400-900ms time window for the Highest- and Lowest-Proficiency groups.
Only significant and marginal results are reported. Where applicable, degrees of freedom were adjusted using the Greenhouse-Geisser correction.