Literature DB >> 20126291

On the interpretation of the number attraction effect: Response time evidence.

Adrian Staub1.   

Abstract

Speakers frequently make subject-verb number agreement errors in the presence of a local noun with a different number from the head of the subject phrase. A series of four experiments used a two-choice response time (RT) paradigm to investigate how the latency of correct agreement decisions is modulated by the presence of a number attractor, and to investigate the relative latency of errors and correct agreement decisions. The presence of a number attractor reliably increased correct RT, and the size of this RT effect was consistently larger in conditions that also had larger effects on accuracy. Number attraction errors, however, were similar in RT to correct responses in the same experimental condition. These results are interpreted as supporting a model according to which an intervening number attractor makes the agreement computation process more difficult in general (Eberhard, Cutting, & Bock, 2005), with errors arising probabilistically. However, attraction from a non-intervening noun resulted in only mildly inflated correct RT, but dramatically inflated error RT, suggesting that non-intervening attraction errors may reflect confusion about the structure of the subject phrase.

Entities:  

Year:  2009        PMID: 20126291      PMCID: PMC2683024          DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2008.11.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mem Lang        ISSN: 0749-596X            Impact factor:   3.059


  29 in total

1.  Semantic factors in the production of number agreement.

Authors:  J Barker; J Nicol; M Garrett
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2001-01

2.  Estimating parameters of the diffusion model: approaches to dealing with contaminant reaction times and parameter variability.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Francis Tuerlinckx
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-09

3.  Speeded old-new recognition of multidimensional perceptual stimuli: modeling performance at the individual-participant and individual-item levels.

Authors:  Robert M Nosofsky; Roger D Stanton
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Philip L Smith
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 8.934

5.  Morphophonological influences on the construction of subject-verb agreement.

Authors:  Robert J Hartsuiker; Herbert J Schriefers; Kathryn Bock; Gerdien M Kikstra
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2003-12

6.  Broken agreement.

Authors:  K Bock; C A Miller
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 7.  The diffusion decision model: theory and data for two-choice decision tasks.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Gail McKoon
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.026

8.  Separating hierarchical relations and word order in language production: is proximity concord syntactic or linear?

Authors:  G Vigliocco; J Nicol
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1998-08

9.  An exemplar-based random walk model of speeded classification.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky; T J Palmeri
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 8.934

10.  Effects of clausal structure on subject-verb agreement errors.

Authors:  J L Nicol
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  1995-11
View more
  17 in total

1.  Comparisons of online reading paradigms: eye tracking, moving-window, and maze.

Authors:  Naoko Witzel; Jeffrey Witzel; Kenneth Forster
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2012-04

2.  Cues, quantification, and agreement in language comprehension.

Authors:  Darren Tanner; Nyssa Z Bulkes
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-12

Review 3.  Aligning grammatical theories and language processing models.

Authors:  Shevaun Lewis; Colin Phillips
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2015-02

4.  Interference in Processing Agreement: The Impact of Grammatical Cues.

Authors:  Maria Garraffa; Alberto Di Domenico
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2016-04

5.  The time-course of feature interference in agreement comprehension: Multiple mechanisms and asymmetrical attraction.

Authors:  Darren Tanner; Janet Nicol; Laurel Brehm
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2014-10-01       Impact factor: 3.059

6.  QUANTIFIERS UNDONE: REVERSING PREDICTABLE SPEECH ERRORS IN COMPREHENSION.

Authors:  Lyn Frazier; Charles Clifton
Journal:  Language (Baltim)       Date:  2011-03-01

7.  Resolving Conflicts in Natural and Grammatical Gender Agreement: Evidence from Eye Movements.

Authors:  Maya Dank; Avital Deutsch; Kathryn Bock
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2015-08

8.  The Role of Case Syncretism in Agreement Attraction: A Comprehension Study.

Authors:  Natalia Slioussar; Varvara Magomedova; Polina Makarova
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-05-06

9.  Interference in the processing of adjunct control.

Authors:  Dan Parker; Sol Lago; Colin Phillips
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-09-08

10.  Immediate sensitivity to structural constraints in pronoun resolution.

Authors:  Wing-Yee Chow; Shevaun Lewis; Colin Phillips
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-06-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.