---
title: "A Corpus of Joint EEG and Self-Paced — Østergaard 2026"
description: "Most EEG studies of reading use hand-built sentences shown at a fixed pace (RSVP)."
authors: ["Sara Møller Østergaard", "Lenneke Doris Lichtenberg", "Laura Boon", "Bruno Nicenboim"]
year: 2026
venue: "Proceedings of the Fifteenth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference"
source: "https://aclanthology.org/2026.lrec-1.880/"
doi: "10.63317/49tvxys2q4zc"
licence: "CC BY-NC 4.0 (ELRA, LREC proceedings)"
licence_url: "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/"
summary_licence: "Elamur Cosmic License"
canonical: "https://research.elamur.ai/free/papers/ostergaard-2026-corpus-joint-eeg-self-paced/"
---
[Elamur Research](https://md.research.elamur.ai/) · [this page in HTML](https://research.elamur.ai/free/papers/ostergaard-2026-corpus-joint-eeg-self-paced/)

[home](https://md.research.elamur.ai/) / [papers](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/) / [2026](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/2026/) / A Corpus of Joint EEG and Self-Paced Reading of Natural Dutch Texts

# A Corpus of Joint EEG and Self-Paced Reading of Natural Dutch Texts

**Authors:** Sara Møller Østergaard, Lenneke Doris Lichtenberg, Laura Boon, Bruno Nicenboim · **Year:** 2026 · **Venue:** Proceedings of the Fifteenth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference · **Licence:** [CC BY-NC 4.0 (ELRA, LREC proceedings)](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)

**Links:** [Publisher's page](https://aclanthology.org/2026.lrec-1.880/) · [PDF](https://aclanthology.org/2026.lrec-1.880.pdf) · [DOI 10.63317/49tvxys2q4zc](https://doi.org/10.63317/49tvxys2q4zc) · [OpenAlex](https://openalex.org/W4414396600)

**Citations:** 0 citations (openalex-snapshot · 2026-10-14) · 1 in our library, of the 140673 papers whose bibliographies we read

## Summary
Most EEG studies of reading use hand-built sentences shown at a fixed pace (RSVP). That pace does not resemble real reading, and it makes brain responses hard to relate to reading-time data. The authors address this with TiNT (Tilburg corpus of Natural Dutch Texts), which records EEG and self-paced reading (SPR) at the same time while people read longer, naturally occurring Dutch texts.

They chose SPR over eye-tracking because the EEG can then be locked to the moment each word appears, and parafoveal preview of upcoming words is ruled out. This keeps the data compatible with standard ERP analyses. The cost is possible motor artifacts from keypresses and overlap between responses to neighbouring words.

To check data quality, the authors looked at:
- comprehension-question accuracy,
- how familiar readers said they were with the texts,
- whether known predictability and frequency effects appear in reading times and in the N400 and P600, using surprisal from Dutch GPT models.

TiNT is one of only a few corpora that pair behavioural and neural data over multi-paragraph discourse. It supports work on context effects and on computational models of reading, and it is available on DataverseNL.

## Key points
- **Participants:** 71 right-handed native Dutch speakers (47 female, mean age 20.31). Two were excluded from the EEG analyses for technical reasons, and one more was excluded from all analyses.
- **Texts:** eight natural texts of about 600 words each, 4,786 words in total. Genres include fairy tales, history, a novel excerpt, technical texts and a TV-show synopsis. Sources are Project Gutenberg and Wikipedia, and one text was translated from English.
- **Design:** each participant read seven texts in SPR and one in RSVP ("Mijn Heer Zak met Rijst" or "Permafrost", counterbalanced across participants), so the procedure could be validated under both paradigms. Presentation used PsychoPy 2022.2.5.
- **Comprehension questions:** three types, labelled local, bridging and global, reflecting different levels of processing.
- **Predictors:** word predictability was estimated with GroNLP/gpt2-small-dutch, GroNLP/gpt2-medium-dutch-embeddings, yhavinga/gpt2-large-dutch and yhavinga/gpt-neo-125M-dutch, alongside spacy/nl_core_news_sm. Log-probabilities from these models correlate at roughly 0.80–0.95.

*Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.*

Fields: [Linguistics & languages](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/shelves/linguistics/)

## Cite

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

```bibtex
@inproceedings{ostergaard2026corpus,
  title = {{A Corpus of Joint EEG and Self-Paced Reading of Natural Dutch Texts}},
  author = {Østergaard, Sara Møller and Lichtenberg, Lenneke Doris and Boon, Laura and Nicenboim, Bruno},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the Fifteenth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference},
  year = {2026},
  doi = {10.63317/49tvxys2q4zc},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.63317/49tvxys2q4zc}
}
```

- [← previous A Corpus for Personalized Dialogue Breakdown Repair in Japanese Open-Domain Conversations](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/tsubokura-2026-corpus-personalized-dialogue-breakdown-repair/)
- [next → A Corpus-Based Profiling of Regional English Variants in Global Media: Insights from Olympic Journalism](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/mao-2026-corpus-based-profiling-regional-english/)
- [↑ back to papers of 2026](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/2026/)

## References

51 references, 1 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Cordula Artelt, Petra Stanat, Wolfgang Schneider, and Ulrich Schiefele. 2001. Lesekompetenz: Testkonzeption und Ergebnisse. In Jürgen Baumert, Eckhard Klieme, Michael Neubrand, Manfred Prenzel, Ulrich Schiefele, Wolfgang Schneider, Petra Stanat, Klaus-Jürgen Tillmann, and Manfred Weiß, editors, PISA 2000: Ba-siskompetenzen von Schülerinnen und Schülern im internationalen Vergleich, pages 69–137. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-83412-6_4)
2. Christoph Aurnhammer, Francesca Delogu, Harm Brouwer, and Matthew W. Crocker. 2023. The P600 as a continuous index of integration effort. Psychophysiology, 60(9):e14302. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.14302)
3. Nyssa Z. Bulkes, Kiel Christianson, and Darren Tanner. 2020. Semantic constraint, reading control, and the granularity of form-based expectations during semantic processing: Evidence from ERPs. Neuropsychologia, 137:107294. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2019.107294)
4. Paul-Christian Bürkner. 2017. brms: An r package for bayesian multilevel models using stan. Journal of Statistical Software, 80(1):1–28. [↗](https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v080.i01)
5. Herbert H. Clark. 1975. Bridging. In Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Herbert+H%2E+Clark%2E+1975%2E+Bridging%2E+In+Theoretical+Issues+in+Natural+Language+Processing%2E)
6. Uschi Cop, Nicolas Dirix, Denis Drieghe, and Wouter Duyck. 2017. Presenting GECO: An eyetracking corpus of monolingual and bilingual sentence reading. Behavior Research Methods, 49(2):602–615. [↗](https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0734-0)
7. Michael Dambacher and Reinhold Kliegl. 2007. Synchronizing timelines: Relations between fixation durations and N400 amplitudes during sentence reading. Brain Research, 1155:147–162. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2007.04.027)
8. Michael Dambacher, Reinhold Kliegl, Markus Hofmann, and Arthur M. Jacobs. 2006. Frequency and predictability effects on event-related potentials during reading. Brain Research, 1084(1):89– 103. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.02.010)
9. Wietse de Vries and Malvina Nissim. 2020. As good as new. how to successfully recycle english gpt-2 to make models for other languages. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Wietse+de+Vries+and+Malvina+Nissim%2E+2020%2E+As+good+as+new%2E+how+to+successfully+recycle+english+gpt%2D2+to+make+models+for+other+languages%2E)
10. Katherine A. Delong, Thomas P. Urbach, David M. Groppe, and Marta Kutas. 2011. Overlapping dual ERP responses to low cloze probability sentence continuations. Psychophysiology, 48(9):1203–1207. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2011.01199.x)
11. Olaf Dimigen, Werner Sommer, Annette Hohlfeld, Arthur M. Jacobs, and Reinhold Kliegl. 2011. Coregistration of eye movements and EEG in natural reading: Analyses and review. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 140(4):552– 572. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023885)
12. Tali Ditman, Phillip J. Holcomb, and Gina R. Kuperberg. 2007. An investigation of concurrent ERP and self-paced reading methodologies. Psychophysiology, 44(6):927–935. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00593.x)
13. Susan F. Ehrlich and Keith Rayner. 1981. Contextual effects on word perception and eye movements during reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20(6):641–655. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5371(81)90220-6)
14. Kara D. Federmeier, Edward W. Wlotko, Esmeralda De Ochoa-Dewald, and Marta Kutas. 2007. Multiple effects of sentential constraint on word processing. Brain research, 1146:75–84. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.06.101)
15. Stefan L. Frank and Anna Aumeistere. 2024. An eye-tracking-with-EEG coregistration corpus of narrative sentences. Language Resources and Evaluation, 58(2):641–657. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-023-09684-x)
16. Stefan L. Frank, Irene Fernandez Monsalve, Robin L. Thompson, and Gabriella Vigliocco. 2013. Reading time data for evaluating broad-coverage models of English sentence processing. Behavior Research Methods, 45(4):1182–1190. [↗](https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0313-y)
17. Stefan L. Frank, Leun J. Otten, Giulia Galli, and Gabriella Vigliocco. 2015. The ERP response to the amount of information conveyed by words in sentences. Brain and Language, 140:1–11. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2014.10.006)
18. Richard Futrell, Edward Gibson, Harry J. Tily, Idan Blank, Anastasia Vishnevetsky, Steven T. Piantadosi, and Evelina Fedorenko. 2021. The Natural Stories corpus: A reading-time corpus of English texts containing rare syntactic constructions. Language Resources and Evaluation, 55(1):63–77. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-020-09503-7)
19. Karin Gehrer, Stefan Zimmermann, Cordula Artelt, and Sabine Weinert. 2013. NEPS framework for assessing reading competence and results from an adult pilot study. Journal for educational research online, 5(2):50–79. [↗](https://doi.org/10.25656/01:8424)
20. John Hale. 2001. A Probabilistic Earley Parser as a Psycholinguistic Model. In Second Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=John+Hale%2E+2001%2E+A+Probabilistic+Earley+Parser+as+a+Psycholinguistic+Model%2E+In+Second+Meeting+of+the+North+American+Chapter+of+the+Association+for+Computational+Linguistics%2E) [our card](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/hale-2001-probabilistic-earley-parser-as-psycholinguistic/)
21. Nora Hollenstein, Maria Barrett, and Marina Björnsdóttir. 2022. The Copenhagen Corpus of Eye Tracking Recordings from Natural Reading of Danish Texts. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, pages 1712–1720, Marseille, France. European Language Resources Association. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Nora+Hollenstein%2C+Maria+Barrett%2C+and+Marina+Bj%C3%B6rnsd%C3%B3ttir%2E+2022%2E+The+Copenhagen+Corpus+of+Eye+Tracking+Recordings+from+Natural+Reading+of+Danish+Texts%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+Thirteenth+Language+Resourc)
22. Nora Hollenstein, Jonathan Rotsztejn, Marius Troendle, Andreas Pedroni, Ce Zhang, and Nicolas Langer. 2018. ZuCo, a simultaneous EEG and eye-tracking resource for natural sentence reading. Scientific Data, 5(1):180291. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Nora+Hollenstein%2C+Jonathan+Rotsztejn%2C+Marius+Troendle%2C+Andreas+Pedroni%2C+Ce+Zhang%2C+and+Nicolas+Langer%2E+2018%2E+ZuCo%2C+a+simultaneous+EEG+and+eye%2Dtracking+resource+for+natural+sentence+reading%2E+Scientific+)
23. Nora Hollenstein, Marius Troendle, Ce Zhang, and Nicolas Langer. 2020. ZuCo 2.0: A dataset of physiological recordings during natural reading and annotation. In Proceedings of the Twelfth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, pages 138–146, Marseille, France. European Language Resources Association. [↗](https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000464814)
24. Matthew Honnibal, Ines Montani, Sofie Van Lan-deghem, and Adriane Boyd. 2020. spaCy: Industrial-strength Natural Language Processing in Python. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Matthew+Honnibal%2C+Ines+Montani%2C+Sofie+Van+Lan%2Ddeghem%2C+and+Adriane+Boyd%2E+2020%2E+spaCy%3A+Industrial%2Dstrength+Natural+Language+Processing+in+Python%2E)
25. Deborah N. Jakobi, Thomas Kern, David R. Reich, Patrick Haller, and Lena A. Jäger. 2024. PoTeC: A German Naturalistic Eye-tracking-while-reading Corpus. Deborah Noemie Jakobi, Maja Stegenwallner-Schütz, Nora Hollenstein, Cui Ding, Ramune Kaspere, Ana Matić Škorić, Eva Pavlinusic Vilus, Stefan Frank, Marie-Luise Müller, Kristine M Jensen De López, Nik Kharlamov, Hanne B. Søndergaard Knudsen, Yevgeni Berzak, Ella Lion, Irina A. Sekerina, Cengiz Acarturk, Mohd Faizan Ansari, Katarzyna Harezlak, Pawel Kasprowski, Ana Bautista, Lisa Beinborn, Anna Bondar, Antonia Boznou, Leah Bradshaw, Jana Mara Hofmann, Thyra Krosness, Not Battesta Soliva, Anila Çepani, Kristina Cergol, Ana Došen, Marijan Palmovic, Adelina Çerpja, Dalí Chirino, Jan Chromý, Vera Demberg, Iza Škrjanec, Nazik Dinçtopal Deniz, Dr. [↗](https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-024-02536-8)
26. Inmaculada Fajardo, Mariola Giménez-Salvador, Xavier Mínguez-López, Maroš Filip, Zigmunds Freibergs, Jéssica Gomes, Andreia Janeiro, Paula Luegi, João Veríssimo, Sasho Gramatikov, Jana Hasenäcker, Alba Haveriku, Nelda Kote, Muhammad M. Kamal, Hanna Kędzierska, Dorota Klimek-Jankowska, Sara Kosutar, Daniel G. Krakowczyk, Izabela Krejtz, Marta Łockiewicz, Kaidi Lõo, Jurgita Motiejūnienė, Jamal A. Nasir, Johanne Sofie Krog Nedergård, Ayşegül Özkan, Mikuláš Preininger, Loredana Pungă, David Robert Reich, Chiara Tschirner, Špela Rot, Andreas Säuberli, Jordi Solé-Casals, Ekaterina Strati, Igor Svoboda, Evis Trandafili, Spyridoula Varlokosta, Mila Vulchanova, and Lena A. Jäger. 2025. MultiplEYE: Creating a multilingual eye-tracking-while-reading corpus. In Proceedings of the 2025 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications, pages 1–11, Tokyo Japan. ACM. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Inmaculada+Fajardo%2C+Mariola+Gim%C3%A9nez%2DSalvador%2C+Xavier+M%C3%ADnguez%2DL%C3%B3pez%2C+Maro%C5%A1+Filip%2C+Zigmunds+Freibergs%2C+J%C3%A9ssica+Gomes%2C+Andreia+Janeiro%2C+Paula+Luegi%2C+Jo%C3%A3o+Ver%C3%ADssimo%2C+Sasho+Gramatikov%2C+Jana+Hasen%C3%A4cker%2C+Alb)
27. Noa Kallioinen, Topi Paananen, Paul-Christian Bürkner, and Aki Vehtari. 2023. Detecting and diagnosing prior and likelihood sensitivity with power-scaling. Statistics and Computing, 34(1):57. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11222-023-10366-5)
28. Alan Kennedy, Joël Pynte, Wayne S. Murray, and Shirley-Anne Paul. 2013. Frequency and predictability effects in the Dundee Corpus: An eye movement analysis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(3):601–618. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.676054)
29. Emmanuel Keuleers, Marc Brysbaert, and Boris New. 2010. SUBTLEX-NL: A new measure for Dutch word frequency based on film subtitles. Behavior Research Methods, 42(3):643–650. [↗](https://doi.org/10.3758/brm.42.3.643)
30. Walter Kintsch. 1998. Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, US. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Walter+Kintsch%2E+1998%2E+Comprehension%3A+A+Paradigm+for+Cognition%2E+Comprehension%3A+A+Paradigm+for+Cognition%2E+Cambridge+University+Press%2C+New+York%2C+NY%2C+US%2E)
31. Benthe Kornrumpf, Florian Niefind, Werner Sommer, and Olaf Dimigen. 2016. Neural Correlates of Word Recognition: A Systematic Comparison of Natural Reading and Rapid Serial Visual Presentation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 28(9):1374–1391. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00977)
32. Franziska Kretzschmar, Matthias Schlesewsky, and Adrian Staub. 2015. Dissociating word frequency and predictability effects in reading: Evidence from coregistration of eye movements and EEG. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(6):1648–1662. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000128)
33. Gina R. Kuperberg, Trevor Brothers, and Edward W. Wlotko. 2020. A Tale of Two Positivities and the N400: Distinct Neural Signatures Are Evoked by Confirmed and Violated Predictions at Different Levels of Representation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 32(1):12–35. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01465)
34. Marta Kutas and Kara D. Federmeier. 2011. Thirty Years and Counting: Finding Meaning in the N400 Component of the Event-Related Brain Potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62(1):621–647. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.131123)
35. Roger Levy. 2008. Expectation-based syntactic comprehension. Cognition, 106(3):1126–1177. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.006)
36. Tal Linzen and T. Florian Jaeger. 2016. Uncertainty and Expectation in Sentence Processing: Evidence From Subcategorization Distributions. Cognitive Science, 40(6):1382–1411. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12274)
37. Bruno Nicenboim. 2018. eeguana: A package for manipulating EEG data in R. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Bruno+Nicenboim%2E+2018%2E+eeguana%3A+A+package+for+manipulating+EEG+data+in+R%2E)
38. Bruno Nicenboim. 2023. pangoling: Access to language model predictions in R. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Bruno+Nicenboim%2E+2023%2E+pangoling%3A+Access+to+language+model+predictions+in+R%2E)
39. Bruno Nicenboim, Daniel J. Schad, and Shravan Vasishth. 2025. The influence of priors: sensitivity analysis. In Introduction to Bayesian Data Analysis for Cognitive Science, 1st edn edition, chapter 3.4, page 634. Chapman & Hall. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Bruno+Nicenboim%2C+Daniel+J%2E+Schad%2C+and+Shravan+Vasishth%2E+2025%2E+The+influence+of+priors%3A+sensitivity+analysis%2E+In+Introduction+to+Bayesian+Data+Analysis+for+Cognitive+Science%2C+1st+edn+edition%2C+chapter+3)
40. Brennan R. Payne and Kara D. Federmeier. 2017. Pace Yourself: Intraindividual Variability in Context Use Revealed by Self-paced Event-related Brain Potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 29(5):837–854. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01090)
41. Jonathan Peirce, Jeremy R. Gray, Sol Simpson, Michael MacAskill, Richard Höchenberger, Hiroyuki Sogo, Erik Kastman, and Jonas Kristoffer Lindeløv. 2019. PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior Research Methods, 51(1):195–203. [↗](https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y)
42. Tiago Pimentel, Clara Meister, Ethan G. Wilcox, Roger Levy, and Ryan Cotterell. 2023. On the Effect of Anticipation on Reading Times. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00603)
43. R Core Team. 2024. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=R+Core+Team%2E+2024%2E+R%3A+A+Language+and+Environment+for+Statistical+Computing%2E+R+Foundation+for+Statistical+Computing%2C+Vienna%2C+Austria%2E)
44. Sara C. Sereno, Christopher J. Hand, Aisha Shahid, Ian G. Mackenzie, and Hartmut Leuthold. 2020. Early EEG correlates of word frequency and contextual predictability in reading. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 35(5):625–640. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1580753)
45. Cory Shain. 2024. Word Frequency and Predictability Dissociate in Naturalistic Reading. Open Mind, 8:177–201. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_a_00119)
46. Noam Siegelman, Sascha Schroeder, Cengiz Acartürk, Hee-Don Ahn, Svetlana Alexeeva, Simona Amenta, Raymond Bertram, Rolando Bonandrini, Marc Brysbaert, Daria Chernova, Sara Maria Da Fonseca, Nicolas Dirix, Wouter Duyck, Argyro Fella, Ram Frost, Carolina A. Gattei, Areti Kalaitzi, Nayoung Kwon, Kaidi Lõo, Marco Marelli, Timothy C. Papadopoulos, Athanassios Protopapas, Satu Savo, Diego E. Shalom, Natalia Slioussar, Roni Stein, Longjiao Sui, Analí Taboh, Veronica Tønnesen, Kerem Alp Usal, and Victor Kuperman. 2022. Expanding horizons of cross-linguistic research on reading: The Multilingual Eye-movement Corpus (MECO). Behavior Research Methods, 54(6):2843–2863. [↗](https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01772-6)
47. Jakub M. Szewczyk and Herbert Schriefers. 2013. Prediction in language comprehension beyond specific words: An ERP study on sentence comprehension in Polish. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(4):297–314. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.12.002)
48. Darren Tanner. 2019. Robust neurocognitive individual differences in grammatical agreement processing: A latent variable approach. Cortex, 111:210–237. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2018.10.011)
49. Cyma Van Petten and Marta Kutas. 1990. Interactions between sentence context and word frequencyinevent-related brainpotentials. Memory & Cognition, 18(4):380–393. [↗](https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03197127)
50. Roslyn Wong, Erik D. Reichle, and Aaron Veldre. 2024. Prediction in reading: A review of predictability effects, their theoretical implications, and beyond. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. [↗](https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-024-02588-z)
51. Sara Møller Østergaard, Lenneke Lichtenberg, Laura Boon, and Bruno Nicenboim. 2025. EEG and Self-Paced Reading of Natural, Dutch Texts. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Sara+M%C3%B8ller+%C3%98stergaard%2C+Lenneke+Lichtenberg%2C+Laura+Boon%2C+and+Bruno+Nicenboim%2E+2025%2E+EEG+and+Self%2DPaced+Reading+of+Natural%2C+Dutch+Texts%2E)