Rules of Engagement: Incomplete and Complete Pronoun Resolution

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 874-887

  Love, Jessica ^a   McKoon, Gail ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Engagement; Pronouns; Reading; Recognition memory

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COMPREHENSION; CONCEPT FORMATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; PROBABILITY; REACTION TIME; READING; RECOGNITION; REFERENCE VALUE; STUDENT; UNIVERSITY;

ATTENTION; COMPREHENSION; CONCEPT FORMATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MALE; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; REACTION TIME; READING; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); REFERENCE VALUES; STUDENTS; UNIVERSITIES;

EID: 79960289818     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0022932     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Arnold J.E. The effects of thematic roles on pronoun use and frequency of reference. Discourse Processes 2001, 31:137-162. doi: 10.1207/S15326950DP3102_02.
2. Arnold J.E., Eisenband J.G., Brown-Schmidt S., Trueswell J.C. The rapid use of gender information: Evidence of the time course of pronoun resolution from eyetracking. Cognition 2000, 76:B13-B26. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00073-1.
3. Bilandzic, H., & Busselle, R. (2008, May). Attention and narrative engagement: Divergences in secondary task reaction times and self-reports of narrative engagement. Paper presented at the Convention of the International Communication Association, Montreal, Ontario, Canada.
4. Busselle R., Bilandzic H. Fictionality and perceived realism in experiencing stories: A model of narrative comprehension and engagement. Communication Theory 2008, 18:255-280. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.00322.x.
5. Carver R. Where I'm calling from: Selected stories 1989, Vintage Books, New York, NY.
6. Christianson K., Hollingworth A., Halliwell J., Ferreira F. Thematic roles assigned along the garden path linger. Cognitive Psychology 2001, 42:368-407. doi: 10.1006/cogp.2001.0752.
7. Crawley R.A., Stevenson R.J., Kleinman D. The use of heuristic strategies in the interpretation of pronouns. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 1990, 19:245-264. doi: 10.1007/BF01077259.
8. Dell G.S., McKoon G., Ratcliff R. The activation of antecedent information during the processing of anaphoric reference in reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1983, 22:121-132. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(83)80010-3.
9. Erickson T.D., Mattson M.E. From words to meaning: A semantic illusion. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1981, 20:540-551. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90165-1.
10. Ferreira F., Bailey K.G.D., Ferraro V. Good-enough representations in language comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2002, 11:11-15. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.00158.
11. Garnham A., Oakhill J., Cruttenden H. The role of implicit causality and gender cue in the interpretation of pronouns. Language and Cognitive Processes 1992, 7:231-255. doi: 10.1080/01690969208409386.
12. Gernsbacher M.A. Mechanisms that improve referential access. Cognition 1989, 32:99-156. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(89)90001-2.
13. Gerrig R., O'Brien E. The scope of memory-based processing. Discourse Processes 2005, 39:225-242. doi: 10.1207/s15326950dp3902&3_7.
14. Gillund G., Shiffrin R.M. A retrieval model for both recognition and recall. Psychological Review 1984, 91:1-67. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.91.1.1.
15. Green M.C., Brock T.C. The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2000, 79:701-721. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.701.
16. Greene S.B., McKoon G., Ratcliff R. Pronoun resolution and discourse models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1992, 18:266-283. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.18.2.266.
17. Grosz B.J. Focusing and description in natural language dialogues. Elements of discourse understanding 1981, 84-105. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. A.K. Joshi, B.L. Webber, I.A. Sag (Eds.).
18. Grosz, B. J., Joshi, A. K., & Weinstein, S. (1983). Providing a unified account of definite noun phrases in discourse. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics (pp. 44-50). Cambridge, MA: Association of Computational Linguistics.
19. Grosz B.J., Sidner C.L. Attention, intentions, and the structure of the discourse. Computational Linguistics 1986, 12:175-204.
20. Hintzman D.L. MINERVA 2: A simulation model of human memory. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 1984, 16:96-101.
21. Howard, D. V. (1985, August). Aging and episodic priming: The propositional structure of sentences. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, CA.
22. Hudson S.B., Tanenhaus M.K., Dell G.S. The effect of the discourse center on the local coherence of a discourse. Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society 1986, 96-101. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
23. Johns, C. L., Long, D. L., & Swaab, T. Y. (2010, March). Do you know who that is? Real-world reference and coreferential processing. Poster session presented at the City University of New York Conference on Human Sentence Processing, New York, NY.
24. Just M.A., Carpenter P.A. The psychology of reading and language comprehension 1987, Allyn & Bacon, Newton, MA.
25. Kintsch W. The use of knowledge in discourse processing: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review 1988, 95:163-182. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163.
26. Kintsch W., Van Dijk T.A. Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review 1978, 85:363-394. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363.
27. Klin C.M., Guzmán A.E., Weingartner K.M., Ralano A.S. When anaphor resolution fails: Partial encoding of anaphoric inferences. Journal of Memory and Language 2006, 54:131-143. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2005.09.001.
28. Levine W.H., Guzmán A.E., Klin C.M. When anaphor resolution fails. Journal of Memory and Language 2000, 43:594-617. doi: 10.1006/jmla.2000.2719.
29. Loftus G.R., Masson M.E.J. Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1994, 1:476-490.
30. Marslen-Wilson W.D., Tyler L.K., Koster C. Integrative processes in utterance resolution. Journal of Memory and Language 1993, 32:647-666.
31. McKoon G., Ratcliff R. The comprehension processes and memory structures involved in anaphoric reference. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1980, 19:668-682. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90255-X.
32. McKoon G., Ratcliff R. Priming in item recognition: The organization of propositions in memory for text. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1980, 19:369-386. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90267-4.
33. McKoon G., Ratcliff R. Inferences about predictable events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1986, 12:108-115. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.12.1.108.
34. McKoon G., Ratcliff R. Inference during reading. Psychological Review 1992, 99:440-466. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.99.3.440.
35. Murdock B.B. A theory for the storage and retrieval of item and associative information. Psychological Review 1982, 89:609-626. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.89.6.609.
36. Myers J.L., O'Brien E.J.L. Accessing the discourse representation during reading. Discourse Processes 1998, 26:131-157. doi: 10.1080/01638539809545042.
37. O'Connor F. A good man is hard to find. Fiction 100: An anthology of short stories 2001, 1135-1146. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. J.H. Pickering (Ed.).
38. Ratcliff R., McKoon G. Priming in item recognition: Evidence for the propositional structure of sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1978, 17:403-417. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(78)90238-4.
39. Rigalleau F., Caplan D. Effects of gender marking in pronominal coindexation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology 2000, 53(A):23-52. doi: 10.1080/027249800390655.
40. Rigalleau F., Caplan D., Baudiffier V. New arguments in favour of an automatic gender pronominal process. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology 2004, 57(A):893-933.
41. Rohde H., Kehler A., Elman J. Event structure and discourse coherence biases in pronoun interpretation. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society 2006, 697-702. Curran Associates, Red Hook, NY.
42. Sanford A.J. Context, attention, and depth of processing during interpretation. Mind & Language 2002, 17:188-206. doi: 10.1111/1468-0017.00195.
43. Sanford A.J., Garrod S.C. What, when and how? Questions of immediacy in anaphoric reference resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes 1989, 4:235-262. doi: 10.1080/01690968908406369.
44. Sanford A.J., Sturt P. Depth of processing in language comprehension: Not noticing the evidence. Trends in Cognitive Science 2002, 6:382-386. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01958-7.
45. Schiefele U. Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist 1991, 26:299-323. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep2603&4_5.
46. Schiefele U. Topic interest, text representation, and quality of experience. Contemporary Educational Psychology 1996, 21:3-18. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1996.0002.
47. Schiefele U., Schreyer I. Intrinsische Lernmotivation und Lernen. Ein berblick zu Ergebnissen der Forschung [Intrinsic motivation of learning and learning: An overview of results of research]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie 1994, 8:1-13.
48. Schraw G., Bruning R., Svoboda C. Sources of situational interest. Journal of Reading Behavior 1995, 27:1-17.
49. Sidner C. Focusing and discourse. Discourse Processes 1983, 6:107-130. doi: 10.1080/01638538309544558.
50. Sidner C. Focusing in the comprehension of definite anaphora. Computational models of discourse 1983, 267-330. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. M. Brady, R. Berwick (Eds.).
51. Smyth R.H. Grammatical determinants of ambiguous pronoun resolution. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 1994, 23:197-229. doi: 10.1007/BF02139085.
52. Stevenson R.J., Crawley R.A., Kleinman D. Thematic roles, focus, and the representation of events. Language and Cognitive Processes 1994, 9:519-548. doi: 10.1080/01690969408402130.
53. Stewart A.J., Holler J., Kidd E. Shallow processing of ambiguous pronouns: Evidence for delay. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology 2007, 60:1680-1696. doi: 10.1080/17470210601160807.
54. Tanenhaus M.K., Spivey-Knowlton M., Eberhard K., Sedivy J. Using eye-movements to study spoken language comprehension: Evidence for visually-mediated incrememtal interpretation. Attention and performance XVI: Information integration in perception and communication 1996, 457-478. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. T. Inuie, J.L. McClelland (Eds.).
55. van den Broek P., Risden K., Husebye-Hartmann E. The role of readers' standards for coherence in the generation of inferences during reading. Sources of coherence in reading 1995, 353-373. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. R.F. Lorch, E.J. O'Brien (Eds.).
56. Webber B. So what can we talk about now?. Computational models of discourse 1983, 331-371. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. M. Brady, R. Berwick (Eds.).