Effects of event knowledge in processing verbal arguments

Journal of Memory and Language

Volumn 63, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 489-505

  Bicknell, Klinton ^a   Elman, Jeffrey L ^b   Hare, Mary ^c   McRae, Ken ^d   Kutas, Marta ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Event knowledge; Event related potentials; Language comprehension; Psycholinguistics; Self paced reading; Sentence processing

Indexed keywords

EID: 78049231772     PISSN: 0749596X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2010.08.004     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Agresti A. Categorical data analysis 2002, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. 2nd ed.
2. Altmann G.T.M., Kamide Y. Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition 1999, 73:247-264.
3. Altmann G.T.M., Kamide Y. The real-time mediation of visual attention by language and world knowledge: Linking anticipatory (and other) eye movements to linguistic processing. Journal of Memory and Language 2007, 57:502-518.
4. Altmann G.T.M., Kamide Y. Discourse-mediation of the mapping between language and the visual world: Eye movements and mental representation. Cognition 2009, 111:55-71.
5. Baayen R. Statistics in psycholinguistics: A critique of some current gold standards. Mental Lexicon Working Papers 2004, 1:1-45.
6. Baayen R., Davidson D., Bates D. Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59:390-412.
7. Bates, D. M., & Sarkar, D. (2008). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375-23.
8. Bicknell K., Rohde H. Dynamic integration of pragmatic expectations and real-world event knowledge in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society 2009, 1216-1221. Cognitive Science Society, Austin, TX. N.A. Taatgen, H. Rijn (Eds.).
9. Blei D.M., Ng A.Y., Jordan M.I. Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research 2003, 3:993-1022.
10. Breslow N.E., Clayton D.G. Approximate inference in generalized linear mixed models. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1993, 88:9-25.
11. Caramazza A., Grober E. Polysemy and the structure of the subjective lexicon. Georgetown University roundtable on languages and linguistics. Semantics: Theory and application 1976, 181-206. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC. C. Rameh (Ed.).
12. Chwilla D.J., Kolk H.H.J. Accessing world knowledge: Evidence from N400 and reaction time priming. Cognitive Brain Research 2005, 25:589-606.
13. Cohen J., MacWhinney B., Flatt M., Provost J. PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 1993, 25:257-271.
14. Cruse D.A. Lexical semantics 1986, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
15. DeLong K.A., Urbach T.P., Kutas M. Probabilistic word pre-activation during language comprehension inferred from electrical brain activity. Nature Neuroscience 2005, 8:1117-1121.
16. Ditman T., Holcomb P.J., Kuperberg G.R. An investigation of concurrent ERP and self-paced reading methodologies. Psychophysiology 2007, 44:927-935.
17. Dixon P. Models of accuracy in repeated-measures designs. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59:447-456.
18. Duffy S.A., Henderson J.M., Morris R.K. Semantic facilitation of lexical access during sentence processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1989, 15:791-801.
19. Federmeier K.D., Kutas M. A rose by any other name: Long-term memory structure and sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language 1999, 41:469-495.
20. Federmeier K.D., McLennan D.B., De Ochoa E., Kutas M. The impact of semantic memory organization and sentence context information on spoken language processing by younger and older adults: An ERP study. Psychophysiology 2002, 39:133-146. (Erratum in: Psychophysiology, 39, 684-687).
21. Filik R. Contextual override of pragmatic anomalies: Evidence from eye movements. Cognition 2008, 106:1038-1046.
22. Griffiths T.L., Steyvers M. A probabilistic approach to semantic representation. Proceedings of the 24th annual conference of the cognitive science society 2002, 381-386. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. W.D. Gray, C. Schunn (Eds.).
23. Griffiths T.L., Steyvers M. Prediction and semantic association. Advances in neural information processing systems 15 2003, 11-18. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. S. Becker, S. Thrun, K. Obermayer (Eds.).
24. Griffiths T.L., Steyvers M. Finding scientific topics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2004, 101:5228-5235.
25. Griffiths T.L., Steyvers M., Tenenbaum J.B. Topics in semantic representation. Psychological Review 2007, 114:211-244.
26. Hare M., Jones M., Thomson C., Kelly S., McRae K. Activating event knowledge. Cognition 2009, 111:151-167.
27. Jackendoff R. Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution 2002, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
28. Jaeger T.F. Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59:434-446.
29. Just M.A., Carpenter P.A., Woolley J.D. Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1982, 111:228-238.
30. Kamide Y., Altmann G.T.M., Haywood S.L. The time-course of prediction in incremental sentence processing: Evidence from anticipatory eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language 2003, 49:133-156.
31. Klein D.E., Murphy G. The representation of polysemous words. Journal of Memory and Language 2001, 45:259-282.
32. Knoeferle P., Crocker M.W. The coordinated interplay of scene, utterance, and world knowledge: Evidence from eye tracking. Cognitive Science 2006, 30:481-529.
33. Knoeferle P., Crocker M.W. The influence of recent scene events on spoken comprehension: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language 2007, 57:519-543.
34. Kutas M., Hillyard S.A. Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science 1980, 207:203-205.
35. Kutas M., Hillyard S.A. Brain potentials reflect word expectancy and semantic association during reading. Nature 1984, 307:161-163.
36. Kutas M., Lindamood T.E., Hillyard S.A. Word expectancy and event-related brain potentials during sentence processing. Preparatory states and processes 1984, 217-237. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey. S. Kornblum, J. Requin (Eds.).
37. Lehrer A. Polysemy, conventionality, and the structure of the lexicon. Cognitive Linguistics 1990, 1:207-246.
38. Matsuki, K., Chow, T., Hare, M., Elman, J. L., Scheepers, C., & McRae, K. (submitted for publication). Event-based plausibility immediately influences on-line language comprehension.
39. McNamara T.P. Theories of priming: I. Associative distance and lag. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1992, 18:1173-1190.
40. McNamara T.P. Priming and theories of memory: A reply to Ratcliff and McKoon. Psychological Review 1994, 101:185-187.
41. McRae K., Boisvert S. Automatic semantic similarity priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1998, 24:558-572.
42. McRae K., Ferretti T.R., Amyote L. Thematic roles as verb-specific concepts. Language & Cognitive Processes 1997, 12:137-176.
43. McRae K., Spivey-Knowlton M.J., Tanenhaus M.K. Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 1998, 38:283-312.
44. Metusalem R., Kutas M., Hare M., McRae K., Elman J.L. Generalized event knowledge activated during online language comprehension. Proceedings of the 32nd annual conference of the cognitive science society 2010, 1058-1063. Cognitive Science Society, Austin, TX. S. Ohlsson, R. Catrambone (Eds.).
45. Morris R.K. Lexical and message-level sentence context effects on fixation times in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1994, 20:92-103.
46. Nieuwland M.S., Kuperberg G.R. When the truth is not too hard to handle: An event-related potential study on the pragmatics of negation. Psychological Science 2008, 19:1213-1218.
47. Nieuwland M.S., Van Berkum J.J.A. When peanuts fall in love: N400 evidence for the power of discourse. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2006, 18:1098-1111.
48. Otten M., Van Berkum J.J.A. What makes a discourse constraining? Comparing the effects of discourse message and scenario fit on the discourse-dependent N400 effect. Brain Research 2007, 1153:166-177.
49. Pinheiro J.C., Bates D.M. Mixed effects models in S and S-Plus 2000, Springer Verlag, New York.
50. Pollatsek A., Well A.D. On the use of counterbalanced designs in cognitive research: A suggestion for a better and more powerful analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1995, 21:785-794.
51. Race D., Klein N., Hare M., Tanenhaus M. What does a shopper expect to save? The role of event knowledge in verb interpretation. Proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the cognitive science society 2009, 2219. Cognitive Science Society, Austin, TX. N.A. Taatgen, H. Rijn (Eds.).
52. Rayner K., Warren T., Juhasz B.J., Liversedge S.P. The effect of plausibility on eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2004, 30:1290-1301.
53. Trueswell J.C., Tanenhaus M.K., Garnsey S.M. Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language 1994, 33:285-318.
54. Van Berkum J.J.A., Brown C.M., Zwitserlood P., Kooijman V., Hagoort P. Anticipating upcoming words in discourse: Evidence from ERPs and reading times. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2005, 31:443-467.
55. Warren, T. (in press). The influence of plausibility and anomaly on eye movements in reading. In I. Gilchrist, S. Everling, & S. Liversedge (Eds.), The Oxford handbook on eye movements.
56. Warren T., McConnell K. Investigating effects of selectional restriction violations and plausibility violation severity on eye-movements in reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2007, 14:770-775.
57. Wicha N.Y., Bates E.A., Moreno E.M., Kutas M. Potato not Pope: Human brain potentials to gender expectation and agreement in Spanish spoken sentences. Neuroscience Letters 2003, 346:165-168.
58. Williams J.N. Processing polysemous words in context: Evidence for interrelated meanings. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 1992, 21:193-218.