The on-line study of sentence comprehension: An examination of dual task paradigms

Journal of Psycholinguistic Research

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 215-231

  Nicol, Janet ^a   Swinney, David ^b   Love, Tracy ^b,c   Hald, Lea ^b  

^a University of Arizona   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cross modal lexical priming; Dual task; Sentence comprehension

Indexed keywords

AFFECT; ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PUBLICATION; REACTION TIME; READING; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

AFFECT; COMPREHENSION; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; NEWSPAPERS; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; READING; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 33745854154     PISSN: 00906905     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10936-006-9012-0     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Boland, J. (1997). The relationship between syntactic and semantic processes in sentence comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12(4), 423-484.
2. Clahsen, H., & Featherston, S. (1999). Antecedent priming at trace positions: Evidence from German scrambling. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28(4), 415-437.
3. Cole, P., & Segui, J. (1994). Grammatical incongruity and vocabulary types. Memory and Cognition, 22, 387-394.
4. Cowart, W., & Cairns, H. S. (1987). Evidence for an anaphoric mechanism within syntactic processing: Some reference relations defy semantic and pragmatic constraints. Memory & Cognition, 15(4), 318-331.
5. Grain, S., & Fodor, J. D. (1985). How can grammars help parsers? In D. R. Dowty, L. Kartunnen, & A. M. Zwicky, (Eds.) Natural language processing: psychology, computational, & theoretical perspectives (pp. 94-128). New York: Cambridge University Press.
6. Deese, J. (1984). Thought into speech: The psychology of a language. Englewood Cliffs, N J: Prentice-Hall.
7. Fischler, I., & Bloom, P. S. (1979). Automatic and attentional processes in the effects of sentence contexts on word recognition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 1-20.
8. Fischler, I., & Bloom, P. S. (1980). Rapid processing of the meaning of sentences. Memory and Cognition, 8, 216-225.
9. Fischler, I., & Bloom, P. S. (1985). Effects of constraint and validity of sentence contexts on lexical decisions. Memory and Cognition, 13, 128-139.
10. Forster, K. I. (1981). Priming and the effects of sentence and lexical contexts on naming time: Evidence for autonomous lexical processing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33, 465-495.
11. Forster, K. (1990). Lexical processing. In: D. Osherson H. Lasnik. An invitation to cognitive science, vol. 1. Language (1st ed.), (pp. 95-131). MIT Press.
12. Foss, Donald J., & Hakes, David T. (1978). Psycholinguistics: An intivduction to the study of language. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
13. Friederici, A. D., & Kilbom, K. (1989). Temporal constraints on language processing: Syntactic priming in Broca's aphasia. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1, 262-272.
14. Garnsey, S. M., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Chapman, R. M. (1989). Evoked potentials and the study of sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 51-60.
15. Goodman, G. O., McClelland, J. L., & Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (1981). The role of syntactic context in word recognition. Memory and Cognition, 9, 580-596.
16. Gorrell, P. (1989). Establishing the loci of serial and parallel effects in syntactic processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 61-74.
17. Gurjanov, M., Lukatela, G., Moskoljevic, J., Savic, M., & Turvery, M. T. (1985). Grammatical priming of inflected nouns by inflected adjectives. Cognition, 19, 55-71.
18. Hickok, G., Canseco-Gonzalez, E., Zurif, E., & Grimshaw, J. (1992). Modularity in locating Wh-Gaps. Journal of Psycholinguistics Research, 21, 547-563.
19. Kroll, J. F., & Potter, M. C. (1984) Recognizing words, pictures and concepts: A comparison of lexical, object, and reality decisions. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 39-66.
20. Love, T., & Swinney, D. (1996). Coreference processing and levels of analysis in object-relative constructions; demonstration of antecedent reactivation with the cross-modal priming paradigm. Journal of Psycholin-guistic Research, 25(1), 5-24.
21. Lukatela, G., Kostic, A., Todorovic, D., Carello, C., & Turvey, M. T. (1987). Type and number of grammatical violations and the grammatical congruency effect in lexical decision. Psychological Research, 49, 37-43.
22. McKee, C., Nicol, J., & McDaniel, D. (1993). Children's application of binding principles during sentence processing. Journal of Language and Cognitive Processes, 8(3), 265-290.
23. McKoon, G., Allbritton, D., Ratcliff, R. (1996). Sentential context effects on lexical decisions with a cross-modal instead of an all-visual procedure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22(6), 1494-1497.
24. McKoon, G., Ratcliff, R., & Ward, G. (1994). Testing theories of language processing: An empirical investigation on the on-line lexical decision task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1219-1228.
25. McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1994). Sentence context and on-line lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Memory, Language and Cognition, 20(5), 1239-1244.
26. Meyer, D. E., Schvaneveldt, R. W., & Ruddy, M. G. (1974). Functions of graphemic and phonemic codes in visual word-recognition. Memory & Cognition, 2, 309-321.
27. Nagel, N., Shapiro, L., & Nawy. (1994). Prosody and the processing of filler-gap sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 23(6), 473-485.
28. Nakano, Y., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2002). Antecedent priming at trace positions in Japanese long-distance scrambling. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31(5), 531-571.
29. Neely, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In D. Besner & G. W. Humphreys (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Visual word recognition (pp. 264-336). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
30. Nicol, J. L. (1993). Processing syntactic dependencies: Task-specific effects. Sixth Annual Conference on Human Sentence Processing, UMASS, Amherst, MA.
31. Nicol, J., & Pickering, M. (1993). Processing syntactically ambiguous sentences: Evidence from semantic priming. Special Issue: Sentence processing: III. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22(2), 207-237.
32. Nicol, J., & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistics Research: Special Issue on Sentence Processing, 78(1), 5-24.
33. Seidenberg, M. S., Waters, G. S., Sanders, M., & Langer, P. (1984). Pre- and postlexical loci of contextual effects on word recognition. Memory and Cognition, 12, 315-328.
34. Stamenov, M., & Andonova, E. (1998). Lexical access and co-reference processing in Bulgarian. In D. Hillert (ed.) Syntax and symantics, vol 31, Sentence processing: A cross linguistic perspective (pp. 167-181). Academic Press.
35. Stowe, L. (1986). Evidence for on-line gap location. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1, 227-245.
36. Swinney, D. (1996). Modes and levels of processing. Presented at University of Michigan Cognitive Science Colloquium Series.
37. Swinney, D. (1999). Parameters and modes of language processing: Evidence from on-line comprehension studies. International conference, on basic mechanisms of language, and language, disorders. Leipzig, Germany.
38. Swinney, D., Ford, M., Frauenfelder, U., & J. Bresnan. (1987). On the temporal course of gap-filling and antecedent assignment during sentence comprehension. In B. Grosz, R. Kaplan, M. Macken, & I. Sag (Eds.) Language structure and processing, Stanford, CA: CSL1.
39. Swinney, D., Onifer, W., Prather, P., & Hirshkowitz, M. (1979). Semantic facilitation across sensory modalities in the processing of individual words and sentences. Memory and Cognition, 7(3), 54-178.
40. Swinney, D. A., & Prather, P. A. (1989). On the comparison of lexical ambiguity by young children: investigation into the development of mental modularity. In D. S. Gorfein (Ed.) Resolving sentence ambiguity (pp. 225-238). Springer -Verlag.
41. Swinney, D., Prather, P., & Love, T. (2000). The time course of lexical access and the role of context: converging evidence from normal and aphasic processing. In Y. Grodzinsky, L. Shapiro, & D. Swinney (Eds.) Language and the brain: Representation and processing (pp. 273-292). New York: Academic Press.
42. Swinney, D., Zurif, E., Prather, P., & Love, T. (1996). Neurological distribution of processing operations underlying language comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 8 (2), 174-184.
43. Tyler, L., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (1977). The on-line effect of semantic context on syntactic processing. Journal of Verbal teaming and Verbal Behavior, 16, 645-659.
44. West, R. G., & Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Robust effects of syntactic structure on visual word processes. Memory and. Cognition, 14, 104-112.
45. Wright, B., & Garrett, M. (1984). Lexical decision in sentences: Effects of syntactic structure. Memory and Cognition, 12(1) 31-45.
46. Yeni-Komshian, G. H. (1998). Speech perception. In J. B. Gleason & N. B. Ratner (Eds.) Psycholinguistics, 2 ed. (pp. 107-156). Harcourt Brace College Publishers.