A repeated-measures one-way ANOVA with the factor RT quartile was applied to test the statistical reliability of this effect. The outcome was corrected for the jackknife procedure (Kiesel et al., 2008). Kutas et al. (1977) applied a Woody filter (Woody, 1967) to identify single-trial P3 latencies and found a strong correlation (r = 0.42–0.66) with RT. We implemented a Woody filter as follows: We calculated a subject mean ERP for syntactic violation difference trials with RTs between 500 and 1250 ms. We then established the time lag of the best correlation between JQ1 this ERP and each single trial of the same subject in a window from 500 to 1500 ms after stimulus onset. For 100

iterations, a new template ERP was calculated by shifting each trial by the identified lag, and the best correlation between the template and individual single trials was computed. The time point of best correlation between single trials and the final template iteration was taken as the latency of the late positivity. We then calculated the skipped Pearson’s correlation coefficient (Rousselet & Pernet, 2012) between single-trial RTs and positive component latency for individual Epacadostat purchase subjects. Then, the same procedure was repeated for the late positivity and the N400 (time window:

0–550 ms) for semantic violations. Problematically, we found that the r obtained from this measure greatly depended on the precise analysis parameters such as window onset and length. Inter-trial phase coherence (ITC;

Delorme, Westerfield, & Makeig, 2007b) is a measure of cross-trial phase consistence of EEG oscillations. Comparing the same single-trial data Ponatinib under two different temporal alignments shows to which time point event-related perturbations are better aligned. ITC is calculated via wavelet decomposition of single trials and the computation of phase consistency per frequency and time point across individual trials. A frontal P3 has been found to show higher phase consistency when trials were aligned to RT than to stimulus onset, indicating RT alignment. We calculated the time and frequency mean ITC from 0.5 to 8 Hz for each subject, separately for RT- and onset-aligned trials, in a 50 ms window focused on the positive peak (EEGLAB function newtimef.m, wavelet decomposition of data from electrode Pz, minimum 2 cycles, 4 s pre-stimulus single-trial baseline). Participants’ overall accuracy on the judgment task was good (mean error rate: 11%; average RT for semantic violations: 831 ms, for morphosyntactic violations: 844 ms). Fig. 1 shows ERPs to semantic and syntactic violations and control conditions. For semantic violations, a vertex-negative component peaked at around 450 ms, followed by a broad vertex-positive wave. Syntactic violations showed a similar late positivity, which was slightly more pronounced than that for semantic violations (paired t-test for amplitude differences between violation and control conditions at electrode PZ: t(19) = 3; p = 0.