A Multiple-Channel Model of Task-Dependent Ambiguity Resolution in Sentence Comprehension

Cognitive Science

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 266-298

  Logačev, Pavel ^a   Vasishth, Shravan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF POTSDAM   (Germany)

Author keywords

Ambiguity; Cognitive modeling; Good enough processing; Parallel processing; Sentence processing; Underspecification; Unrestricted race model; URM

Indexed keywords

COMPREHENSION; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; READING; THEORETICAL MODEL;

COMPREHENSION; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; REACTION TIME; READING;

EID: 84961216404     PISSN: 03640213     EISSN: 15516709     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12228     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data. A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
2. Baayen, R. H., & Milin, P. (2010). Analyzing reaction times. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(2), 12-28.
3. Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255-278.
4. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2013). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using using Eigen and S4.
5. Box, G. E. P., & Cox, D. R. (1964). An analysis of transformations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 26(2), 211-252.
6. Colonius, H., & Vorberg, D. (1994). Distribution inequalities for parallel models with unlimited capacity. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 38(1), 35-58. 10.1006/jmps.1994.1002
7. Cousineau, D. (2005). Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson's method. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 1(1), 2-5.
8. Ferreira, F. (2003). The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 47(2), 164-203.
9. Frazier, L. (1979). On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies (Doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut.
10. Frazier, L. (1987). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 559-586). London: Erlbaum.
11. Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. J. (1997). Construal: Overview, motivation, and some new evidence. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26(3), 277-295.
12. Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 178-210.
13. Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2007). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
14. Hemforth, B., Konieczny, L., & Scheepers, C. (2000). Syntactic attachment and anaphor resolution: Two sides of relative clause attachment. In M. Crocker, M. Pickering, & C. Clifton (Eds.), Architectures and mechanisms for language processing (pp. 259-282). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
15. Hesterberg, T., Moore, D. S., Clipson, A., & Epstein, R. (2005). Bootstrap methods and permutation tests. In D. S. Moore and G. P. McCabe (Eds.), Introduction to the practice of statistics (5th ed., pp. 1-70). New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.
16. Kaakinen, J. K., Hyönä, J., & Keenan, J. M. (2002). Perspective effects on online text processing. Discourse Processes, 33(2), 159-173.
17. Lacouture, Y., & Cousineau, D. (2008). How to use MATLAB to fit the ex-Gaussian and other probability functions to a distribution of response times. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 4(1), 35-45.
18. Lewis, R. L. (2000). Falsifying serial and parallel parsing models: Empirical conundrums and an overlooked paradigm. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29(2), 241-248.
19. Lewis, R. L., & Vasishth, S. (2005). An activation-based model of sentence processing as skilled memory retrieval. Cognitive Science, 29(3), 375-419.
20. Lewis, R. L., Vasishth, S., & Van Dyke, J. A. (2006). Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(10), 447-454.
21. Limpert, E., Stahel, W. A., & Abbt, M. (2001). Log-normal distributions across the sciences: Keys and clues. BioScience, 51(5), 341-352.
22. Martin, A. E., & McElree, B. (2009). Memory operations that support language comprehension: Evidence from verb-phrase ellipsis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(5), 1231.
23. McConkie, G. W., Rayner, K., & Wilson, S. J. (1973). Experimental manipulation of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66(1), 1-8.
24. McElree, B. (2000). Sentence comprehension is mediated by content-addressable memory structures. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29(2), 111-123.
25. McRae, K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 38(3), 283-312.
26. Miller, J. (1982). Divided attention: Evidence for coactivation with redundant signals. Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 247-279.
27. Morey, R. D. (2008). Confidence intervals from normalized data: A correction to Cousineau (2005). Tutorial in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 4(2), 61-64.
28. Myung, I. J. (2003). Tutorial on maximum likelihood estimation. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 47(1), 90-100.
29. Nelder, J. A., & Mead, R. (1965). A simplex method for function minimization. The Computer Journal, 7(4), 308-313.
30. Pinheiro, J. C., & Bates, D. M. (2000). Mixed-effects models in S and S-plus. New York: Springer.
31. R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
32. Raab, D. (1962). Statistical facilitation of simple reaction times. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences, 24(5), 574-590.
33. Swets, B., Desmet, T., Clifton, C., & Ferreira, F. (2008). Underspecification of syntactic ambiguities: Evidence from self-paced reading. Memory and Cognition, 36(1), 201-216.
34. Townsend, J. T., & Ashby, G. F. (1983). Stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
35. Townsend, J. T., & Colonius, H. (1997). Parallel processing response times and experimental determination of the stopping rule. Journal of mathematical psychology, 41(4), 392-397.
36. Townsend, J. T., & Honey, C. J. (2007). Consequences of base time for redundant signals experiments. Journal of Mathematical Psychology(51), 1-24.
37. Traxler, M. J., Pickering, M. J., & Clifton, C. (1998). Adjunct attachment is not a form of lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 39(4), 558-592.
38. Ulrich, R., & Miller, J. (1993). Information processing models generating lognormally distributed reaction times. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 37, 513-525.
39. van Gompel, R. P. G., & Pickering, M. J. (2006). Syntactic parsing. In M. J. Traxler, & M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (2nd ed., pp. 289-307). London: Academic Press.
40. van Gompel, R. P. G., Pickering, M. J., & Traxler, M. J. (2000). Unrestricted race: A new model of syntactic ambiguity resolution. In A. Kennedy, R. Radach, D. Heller, & J. Pynte (Eds.), Reading as a perceptual process. Oxford, England: Elsevier.
41. van Gompel, R. P. G., Pickering, M. J., & Traxler, M. J. (2001). Reanalysis in sentence processing: Evidence against current constraint-based and two-stage models. Journal of Memory and Language, 45(2), 225-258. 10.1006/jmla.2001.2773
42. van Gompel, R. P. G., Pickering, M. J., Pearson, J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2005). Evidence against competition during syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 52(2), 284-307.
43. Van Zandt, T. (2002). Analysis of response time distributions. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1-99.
44. Vasishth, S., & Lewis, R. L. (2006). Argument-head distance and processing complexity: Explaining both locality and antilocality effects. Language, 82(4), 767.
45. Venables, W. N., & Ripley, B. D. (2002). Modern applied statistics with S-PLUS. New York: Springer.
46. Wagenmakers, E.-J., & Brown, S. (2007). On the linear relation between the mean and the SD of a response time distribution. Psychological Review, 114(3), 830-841.
47. Wehrens, R., Putter, H., & Buydens, L. M. C. (2000). The bootstrap: A tutorial. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 54(1), 35-52.
48. Wotschack, C. (2009). Eye movements in reading strategies (Doctoral dissertation). Unversität Potsdam.