Distinguishing effects of structure and decay on attachment and repair: A cue-based parsing account of recovery from misanalyzed ambiguities

By Julie A. Van Dyke, Richard L. Lewis. 2003

311 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c654b77bf7e75d8c9ece2f70db39020546e47eb9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Cognitive and linguistic factors affecting subject/object asymmetry: An eye-tracking study of prenominal relative clauses in Korean (2010, background): “Because the embedded verb intervenes between the two critical NPs, similarity should not cause processing interference during memory encoding but could interfere during memory retrieval processes that take place after the relevant NPs and verb have been encountered (Lee et al. 2007, Van Dyke & McElr”
Accounting for regressive eye-movements in models of sentence processing: A reappraisal of the Selective Reanalysis hypothesis (2008, background): “…(e.g., Ferreira & Henderson, 1991, 1993; Fodor & Ferreira, 1998; Fodor & Inoue, 1994; Sturt & Crocker, 1996; Sturt, Pickering & Crocker, 1999; van Dyke & Lewis, 2003), there has been remarkably little discussion of the ways in which eye-movements themselves might be orchestrated by such…”
The statistical significance filter leads to overoptimistic expectations of replicability (2018, unknown): “Similarly, many studies show evidence for memory-based effects; see, for example, Grodner and Gibson (2005), Van Dyke and Lewis (2003), Van Dyke and McElree (2006), Van Dyke and McElree (2011).”
Psycholinguistics, formal grammars, and cognitive science (2005, background): “…linguistic theory, they concluded that all attempts to link linguistics and psychology were doomed, because linguists were concerned with inventing abstract structures whereas psychologists were interested in something they called “psychological reality” (see, for example, Halle et al. 1978).”
Similarity-based interference in sentence comprehension: Literature review and Bayesian meta-analysis (2017, background): “Several researchers in sentence comprehension have argued that the formation of dependencies between non-adjacent words relies on a cue-based retrieval mechanism that leads to interference effects (McElree, 2000; Van Dyke & Lewis, 2003; Lewis, Vasishth, & Van Dyke, 2006; Van Dyke & McElree, 2011).”
Processing of relative clauses is made easier by frequency of occurrence (2007, background): “Frequency alone is unlikely to provide an explanation for these results, pointing toward a memory-based interpretation (see also Van Dyke & Lewis, 2003 ).”
Clearing the garden-path: improving sentence processing through cognitive control training (2014, background): “Certainly, several explanations of syntactic complexity effects hinge on ambiguity-resolution functions that could be couched in cognitive control terms (Gennari & MacDonald, 2008; Van Dyke & Lewis, 2003).”
Contrasting intrusion profiles for agreement and anaphora: Experimental and modeling evidence (2013, unknown): “Thus a major question for cue-based parsing models concerns the nature of the cues used and how they are combined at retrieval (see Van Dyke & McElree, 2011).”
Online Syntactic Storage Costs in Sentence Comprehension. (2005, background): “The inclusion of the second RC could have caused interference between the two whfiller pronouns for the RC condition, such that both are seeking an embedded position to be interpreted with (cf., Lewis, 1996; van Dyke & Lewis, 2003 ).”
An Activation-Based Model of Sentence Processing as Skilled Memory Retrieval (2005, methodology): “Data from Grodner, Gibson, & Tunstall (2002), and Van Dyke & Lewis (2003) .”