Questions versus statements: Challenging an assumption about semantic illusions

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 60, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 779-789

  Büttner, Anke Caroline ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WOLVERHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; HUMAN; ILLUSION; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LINGUISTICS; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; READING; SEMANTICS; STUDENT;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COMMUNICATION; HUMANS; ILLUSIONS; LINGUISTICS; READING; SEMANTICS; STUDENTS;

EID: 34248997777     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470210701228744     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Barton, S. B., & Sanford, A. J. (1993). A case study of anomaly detection: Shallow semantic processing and cohesion establishment, Memory & Cognition, 21, 477-487.
2. Brédart, S., & Docquier, M. (1989). The Moses illusion: A follow-up on the focalization effect. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive/European Bulletin of Cognitive Psychology, 9, 357-362.
3. Brédart, S., & Modolo, K. (1988). Moses strikes again: Focalization effect on a semantic illusion. Acta Psychologies 67, 135-144.
4. Cruse, D. A. (2000). Meaning in language: An introduction to semantics and pragmatics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
5. Erickson, T. D., & Mattson, M. E. (1981). From words to meaning: A semantic illusion. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 540-551.
6. Fiebach, C. J., Schlesewsky, M., & Friederici, A. D. (2001). Syntactic working memory and the establishment of filler-gap dependencies: Insights from ERPs and fMRI. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 321-338.
7. Graesser, A. C., McMahen, C. L., & Johnson, B. K. (1994). Question asking and answering. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 517-538). New York: Academic Press.
8. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts. New York: Academic Press.
9. Grice, H. P. (1978). Further notes on logic and conversation. In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and semantics 9. New York Academic Press.
10. Hannon, B., & Daneman, M. (2001). Susceptibility to semantic illusions: An individual-differences perspective. Memory and Cognition, 29, 449-461.
11. Kamas, E. N., Reder, L. M., & Ayers, M. S. (1996). Partial matching in the Moses illusion: Response bias not sensitivity. Memory & Cognition, 24, 687-699.
12. Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13. Reder, L. M., & Kusbit, G. W. (1991). Locus of the Moses illusion: Imperfect encoding, retrieval or match? Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 385-406.
14. Shafto, M., & MacKay, D. G. (2000). The Moses, mega-Moses and Armstrong illusions: Integrating language comprehension and semantic memory. Psychological Science, 11, 372-378.
15. Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. London: Longman.
16. van Jaarsveld, H. J., Dijkstra, T., & Hermans, D. (1997). The detection of semantic illusions: Task-specific effects for similarity and position of distorted terms. Psychological Research / Psychologische Forschung, 59, 219-230.
17. van Oostendorp, H., & de Mul, S. (1990). Moses beats Adam: A semantic relatedness effect on a semantic illusion. Acta Psychologica, 74, 35-46.