{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02118003025718608, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.62, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
MEG studies of word production: What next?

ABSTRACT Our peers’ insights on our work are strongly appreciated, and it is gratifying to think that our review should stimulate so much considered thought and discussion. Here, we identify and collate some key issues, and respond to specific points made by the commentators. These include the variability in task and in performance, the theoretical distinctions between serial, parallel, and hierarchical models, the links between the cognitive models and the neurophysiological signal, and finally avenues for improving the accumulation of knowledge on word production processes by means of magnetoencephalography.