Linguistic focus and memory: An eye movement study

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 73-86

  Ward, Peter ^a   Sturt, Patrick ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EYE MOVEMENT; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LANGUAGE ABILITY; MEMORY; MONITORING; NORMAL HUMAN; READING; SEMANTICS; TASK PERFORMANCE; WORD RECOGNITION;

EID: 34247564980     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03195944     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. BIRCH, S. L., & GARNSEY, S. M. (1995). The effect of focus on memory for words in sentences. Journal of Memory & Language, 34, 232-267.
2. BIRCH, S. [L.], & RAYNER, K. (1997). Linguistic focus affects eye movements during reading. Memory & Cognition, 25, 653-660.
3. BLANCHARD, H. E., POLLATSEK, A., & RAYNER, K. (1989). The acquisition of parafoveal word information in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 46, 85-94.
4. BREDART, S., & MODOLO, K. (1988). Moses strikes again: Focalization effect on a semantic illusion. Acta Psychologica, 67, 135-144.
5. BRITISH NATIONAL CORPUS (1995). Available at www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk.
6. CHOMSKY, N. (1971). Deep structure, surface structure and semantic interpretation. In D. D. Steinberg & L. A. Jakobovits (Eds.), Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics and psychology (pp. 183-216). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. CONRAD, F. G., & RIPS, L. J. (1986). Conceptual combination and the given/new distinction. Journal of Memory & Language, 25, 255-278.
8. CUTLER, A., & FODOR, J. A. (1979). Semantic focus and sentence comprehension. Cognition, 7, 49-59.
9. ERICKSON, T. D., & MATTSON, M. E. (1981). From words to meaning: A semantic illusion. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 20, 540-551.
10. FERREIRA, F., BAILEY, K. G. D., & FERRARO, V. (2002). Good-enough representations in language comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 11-15.
11. GERGELY, G. (1992). Focus-based inferences in sentence comprehension. In I. A. Sag & A. Szabolcsi (Eds.), Lexical matters (pp. 47-65). Stanford: Stanford Center for the Study of Language & Information.
12. GERNSBACHER, M. A., & HARGREAVES, D. (1988). Accessing sentence participants: The advantage of first mention. Journal of Memory & Language, 27, 699-717.
13. HALLIDAY, M. A. K. (1967). Notes on transitivity and theme in English, part 2. Journal of Linguistics, 3, 199-244.
14. HOBBS, J. R. (1985, August). Granularity. Paper presented at the 9th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Los Angeles.
15. HOLLINGWORTH, A., & HENDERSON, J. M. (2002). Accurate visual memory for previously attended objects in natural scenes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 28, 113-136.
16. HOLLINGWORTH, A., & HENDERSON, J. M. (2003). Testing a conceptual locus for the inconsistent object change detection advantage in real-world scenes. Memory & Cognition, 31, 930-940.
17. HOLLINGWORTH, A., WILLIAMS, C. C., & HENDERSON, J. M. (2001). To see and remember. Visually specific information is retained in memory from previously attended objects in natural scenes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 761-768.
18. MORRIS, R. K., & FOLK, J. R. (1998). Focus as a contextual priming mechanism in reading. Memory & Cognition, 26, 1313-1322.
19. RANEY, G. E. (2003). A context-dependent representation model for explaining text repetition effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 15-28.
20. RANEY, G. E., & RAYNER, K. (1995). Word frequency effects and eye movements during two readings of a text. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49, 151-172.
21. RANEY, G. E., THERRIAULT, D. J., & MINKOFF, S. R. B. (2000). Repetition effects from paraphrased text: Evidence for an integrated representation model of text representation. Discourse Processes, 29, 61-81.
22. RAYNER, K., WELL, A. D., POLLATSEK, A., & BERTERA, J. H. (1982). The availability of useful information to the right of fixation in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 31, 537-550.
23. RENSINK, R. A., O'REGAN, J. K., & CLARK, J. J. (1997). To see or not to see: The need for attention to perceive changes in scenes. Psychological Science, 8, 368-373.
24. ROOTH, M. (1995). Focus. In S. Lappin (Ed.), The handbook of contemporary semantic theory (pp. 271-298). Oxford: Blackwell.
25. SANFORD, A. J., & STURT, P. (2002). Depth of processing in language comprehension: Not noticing the evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 382-386.
26. STURT, P., SANFORD, A. J., STEWART, A., & DAWYDIAK, E. (2004). Linguistic focus and good-enough representations: An application of the change-detection paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 882-888.
27. THORNTON, I. M., & FERNANDEZ-DUQUE, D. (2002). Converging evidence for the detection of change without awareness. In J. Hyönä, D. P. Munoz, W. Heide, & R. Radach (Eds.), The brain's eye: Neurobiological and clinical aspects of oculomotor research (pp. 99-118). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
28. ZIMMER, H. D., & ENGELKAMP, J. (1981). The given-new structure of cleft sentences and their influence on picture viewing. Psychological Research, 43, 375-389.