@article{PatilVasishthLewis2016,
  author    = {Patil, Umesh and Vasishth, Shravan and Lewis, Richard L.},
  title     = {Retrieval Interference in Syntactic Processing: The Case of Reflexive Binding in English},
  series = {Frontiers in psychology},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Frontiers in psychology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00329},
  pages     = {18},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {It has been proposed that in online sentence comprehension the dependency between a reflexive pronoun such as himself/herself and its antecedent is resolved using exclusively syntactic constraints. Under this strictly syntactic search account, Principle A of the binding theory—which requires that the antecedent c-command the reflexive within the same clause that the reflexive occurs in—constrains the parser's search for an antecedent. The parser thus ignores candidate antecedents that might match agreement features of the reflexive (e.g., gender) but are ineligible as potential antecedents because they are in structurally illicit positions. An alternative possibility accords no special status to structural constraints: in addition to using Principle A, the parser also uses non-structural cues such as gender to access the antecedent. According to cue-based retrieval theories of memory (e.g., Lewis and Vasishth, 2005), the use of non-structural cues should result in increased retrieval times and occasional errors when candidates partially match the cues, even if the candidates are in structurally illicit positions. In this paper, we first show how the retrieval processes that underlie the reflexive binding are naturally realized in the Lewis and Vasishth (2005) model. We present the predictions of the model under the assumption that both structural and non-structural cues are used during retrieval, and provide a critical analysis of previous empirical studies that failed to find evidence for the use of non-structural cues, suggesting that these failures may be Type II errors. We use this analysis and the results of further modeling to motivate a new empirical design that we use in an eye tracking study. The results of this study confirm the key predictions of the model concerning the use of non-structural cues, and are inconsistent with the strictly syntactic search account. These results present a challenge for theories advocating the infallibility of the human parser in the case of reflexive resolution, and provide support for the inclusion of agreement features such as gender in the set of retrieval cues.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{PaapeVasishth2016,
  author    = {Paape, Dario and Vasishth, Shravan},
  title     = {Local Coherence and Preemptive Digging-in Effects in German},
  series = {Language and speech},
  volume    = {59},
  journal   = {Language and speech},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0023-8309},
  doi       = {10.1177/0023830915608410},
  pages     = {387 -- 403},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {SOPARSE predicts so-called local coherence effects: locally plausible but globally impossible parses of substrings can exert a distracting influence during sentence processing. Additionally, it predicts digging-in effects: the longer the parser stays committed to a particular analysis, the harder it becomes to inhibit that analysis. We investigated the interaction of these two predictions using German sentences. Results from a self-paced reading study show that the processing difficulty caused by a local coherence can be reduced by first allowing the globally correct parse to become entrenched, which supports SOPARSE's assumptions.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HoehleFritzscheMueller2016,
  author    = {H{\"o}hle, Barbara and Fritzsche, Tom and M{\"u}ller, Anja},
  title     = {Children's Comprehension of Sentences with Focus Particles and the Role of Cognitive Control},
  series = {PLoS one},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {PLoS one},
  number    = {3},
  publisher = {PLoS},
  address   = {Lawrence, Kan.},
  issn      = {1932-6203},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0149870},
  pages     = {1 -- 27},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Children's interpretations of sentences containing focus particles do not seem adult-like until school age. This study investigates how German 4-year-old children comprehend sentences with the focus particle 'nur' (only) by using different tasks and controlling for the impact of general cognitive abilities on performance measures. Two sentence types with 'only' in either pre-subject or pre-object position were presented. Eye gaze data and verbal responses were collected via the visual world paradigm combined with a sentence-picture verification task. While the eye tracking data revealed an adult-like pattern of focus particle processing, the sentence-picture verification replicated previous findings of poor comprehension, especially for 'only' in pre-subject position. A second study focused on the impact of general cognitive abilities on the outcomes of the verification task. Working memory was related to children's performance in both sentence types whereas inhibitory control was selectively related to the number of errors for sentences with 'only' in pre-subject position. These results suggest that children at the age of 4 years have the linguistic competence to correctly interpret sentences with focus particles, which-depending on specific task demands-may be masked by immature general cognitive abilities.},
  language  = {en}
}