Literature DB >> 17910193

Working memory contributions to relative clause attachment processing: a hierarchical linear modeling analysis.

Matthew J Traxler1.   

Abstract

An eye-movement-monitoring experiment tested readers' responses to sentences containing relative clauses that could be attached to one or both of two preceding nouns. Previous experiments with such sentences have indicated that globally ambiguous relative clauses are processed more quickly than are determinately attached relative clauses. Central to the present research, a recent study (Swets, Desmet, Hambrick, & Ferreira, 2007) showed that offline preferences for such sentences differ as a function of working memory capacity. Specifically, both English and Dutch participants' preference for the second of two nouns as the host for the relative clause increased as their working memory capacity increased. In the present study, readers' working memory capacity was measured, and eye movements were monitored. Hierarchical linear modeling was used to determine whether working memory capacity moderated readers' online processing performance. The modeling indicated that determinately attached sentences were harder to process than globally ambiguous sentences, that working memory did not affect processing of the relative clause itself, but that working memory did moderate how easy it was to integrate the relative clause with the preceding sentence context. Specifically, in contrast with the offline results from Swets and colleagues' study, readers with higher working memory capacity were more likely to prefer the first noun over the second noun as the host for the relative clause.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17910193     DOI: 10.3758/bf03193482

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  28 in total

Review 1.  Verbal working memory and sentence comprehension.

Authors:  D Caplan; G S Waters
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 12.579

2.  The reliability and stability of verbal working memory measures.

Authors:  Gloria S Waters; David Caplan
Journal:  Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput       Date:  2003-11

3.  Memory-load interference in syntactic processing.

Authors:  Peter C Gordon; Randall Hendrick; William H Levine
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2002-09

4.  Working memory constraints on the processing of syntactic ambiguity.

Authors:  M C MacDonald; M A Just; P A Carpenter
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 5.  A capacity theory of comprehension: individual differences in working memory.

Authors:  M A Just; P A Carpenter
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 8.934

6.  The effect of plausibility on eye movements in reading.

Authors:  Keith Rayner; Tessa Warren; Barbara J Juhasz; Simon P Liversedge
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  Who Did What and When? Using Word- and Clause-Level ERPs to Monitor Working Memory Usage in Reading.

Authors:  J W King; M Kutas
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 3.225

8.  The capacity theory of comprehension: new frontiers of evidence and arguments.

Authors:  M A Just; P A Carpenter; T A Keller
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 8.934

9.  Resolving attachment ambiguities with multiple constraints.

Authors:  M Spivey-Knowlton; J C Sedivy
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1995-06

10.  Relative clause interpretation preferences in Spanish and English.

Authors:  M Carreiras; C Clifton
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  1993 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 1.500

View more
  9 in total

1.  Sentence complexity and working memory effects in ambiguity resolution.

Authors:  Ji Hyon Kim; Kiel Christianson
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2013-10

2.  Underspecification of syntactic ambiguities: evidence from self-paced reading.

Authors:  Benjamin Swets; Timothy Desmet; Charles Clifton; Fernanda Ferreira
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2008-01

3.  A hierarchical linear modeling analysis of working memory and implicit prosody in the resolution of adjunct attachment ambiguity.

Authors:  Matthew J Traxler
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2009-04-18

4.  Individual differences in syntactic processing: Is there evidence for reader-text interactions?

Authors:  Ariel N James; Scott H Fraundorf; Eun-Kyung Lee; Duane G Watson
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 3.059

5.  Testing the online reading effects of emotionality on relative clause attachment.

Authors:  Javier García-Orza; José Manuel Gavilán; Isabel Fraga; Pilar Ferré
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2017-04-26

6.  Effects of individual differences in verbal skills on eye-movement patterns during sentence reading.

Authors:  Victor Kuperman; Julie A Van Dyke
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 3.059

7.  How aging and bilingualism influence language processing: theoretical and neural models.

Authors:  Eleonora Rossi; Michele T Diaz
Journal:  Linguist Approaches Biling       Date:  2016-01-25

8.  Aging and individual differences in binding during sentence understanding: evidence from temporary and global syntactic attachment ambiguities.

Authors:  Brennan R Payne; Sarah Grison; Xuefei Gao; Kiel Christianson; Daniel G Morrow; Elizabeth A L Stine-Morrow
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2013-11-30

9.  Retrieval interference in reflexive processing: experimental evidence from Mandarin, and computational modeling.

Authors:  Lena A Jäger; Felix Engelmann; Shravan Vasishth
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-05-27
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.