@article{JaegerEngelmannVasishth2015, author = {J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Engelmann, Felix and Vasishth, Shravan}, title = {Retrieval interference in reflexive processing: experimental evidence from Mandarin, and computational modeling}, series = {Frontiers in psychology}, volume = {6}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00617}, pages = {24}, year = {2015}, abstract = {We conducted two eye-tracking experiments investigating the processing of the Mandarin reflexive ziji in order to tease apart structurally constrained accounts from standard cue-based accounts of memory retrieval. In both experiments, we tested whether structurally inaccessible distractors that fulfill the animacy requirement of ziji influence processing times at the reflexive. In Experiment 1, we manipulated animacy of the antecedent and a structurally inaccessible distractor intervening between the antecedent and the reflexive. In conditions where the accessible antecedent mismatched the animacy cue, we found inhibitory interference whereas in antecedent-match conditions, no effect of the distractor was observed. In Experiment 2, we tested only antecedent-match configurations and manipulated locality of the reflexive-antecedent binding (Mandarin allows non-local binding). Participants were asked to hold three distractors (animate vs. inanimate nouns) in memory while reading the target sentence. We found slower reading times when animate distractors were held in memory (inhibitory interference). Moreover, we replicated the locality effect reported in previous studies. These results are incompatible with structure-based accounts. However, the cue-based ACT-R model of Lewis and Vasishth (2005) cannot explain the observed pattern either. We therefore extend the original ACT-R model and show how this model not only explains the data presented in this article, but is also able to account for previously unexplained patterns in the literature on reflexive processing.}, language = {en} } @article{JaegerChenLietal.2015, author = {J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Chen, Zhong and Li, Qiang and Lin, Chien-Jer Charles and Vasishth, Shravan}, title = {The subject-relative advantage in Chinese: Evidence for expectation-based processing}, series = {Journal of memory and language}, volume = {79}, journal = {Journal of memory and language}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {San Diego}, issn = {0749-596X}, doi = {10.1016/j.jml.2014.10.005}, pages = {97 -- 120}, year = {2015}, abstract = {Chinese relative clauses are an important test case for pitting the predictions of expectation-based accounts against those of memory-based theories. The memory-based accounts predict that object relatives are easier to process than subject relatives because, in object relatives, the distance between the relative clause verb and the head noun is shorter. By contrast, expectation-based accounts such as surprisal predict that the less frequent object relative should be harder to process. In previous studies on Chinese relative clause comprehension, local ambiguities may have rendered a comparison between relative clause types uninterpretable. We designed experimental materials in which no local ambiguities confound the comparison. We ran two experiments (self-paced reading and eye-tracking) to compare reading difficulty in subject and object relatives which were placed either in subject or object modifying position. The evidence from our studies is consistent with the predictions of expectation-based accounts but not with those of memory-based theories. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Jaeger2015, author = {J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann}, title = {Working memory and prediction in human sentence parsing}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-82517}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xi, 144}, year = {2015}, abstract = {This dissertation investigates the working memory mechanism subserving human sentence processing and its relative contribution to processing difficulty as compared to syntactic prediction. Within the last decades, evidence for a content-addressable memory system underlying human cognition in general has accumulated (e.g., Anderson et al., 2004). In sentence processing research, it has been proposed that this general content-addressable architecture is also used for language processing (e.g., McElree, 2000). Although there is a growing body of evidence from various kinds of linguistic dependencies that is consistent with a general content-addressable memory subserving sentence processing (e.g., McElree et al., 2003; VanDyke2006), the case of reflexive-antecedent dependencies has challenged this view. It has been proposed that in the processing of reflexive-antecedent dependencies, a syntactic-structure based memory access is used rather than cue-based retrieval within a content-addressable framework (e.g., Sturt, 2003). Two eye-tracking experiments on Chinese reflexives were designed to tease apart accounts assuming a syntactic-structure based memory access mechanism from cue-based retrieval (implemented in ACT-R as proposed by Lewis and Vasishth (2005). In both experiments, interference effects were observed from noun phrases which syntactically do not qualify as the reflexive's antecedent but match the animacy requirement the reflexive imposes on its antecedent. These results are interpreted as evidence against a purely syntactic-structure based memory access. However, the exact pattern of effects observed in the data is only partially compatible with the Lewis and Vasishth cue-based parsing model. Therefore, an extension of the Lewis and Vasishth model is proposed. Two principles are added to the original model, namely 'cue confusion' and 'distractor prominence'. Although interference effects are generally interpreted in favor of a content-addressable memory architecture, an alternative explanation for interference effects in reflexive processing has been proposed which, crucially, might reconcile interference effects with a structure-based account. It has been argued that interference effects do not necessarily reflect cue-based retrieval interference in a content-addressable memory but might equally well be accounted for by interference effects which have already occurred at the moment of encoding the antecedent in memory (Dillon, 2011). Three experiments (eye-tracking and self-paced reading) on German reflexives and Swedish possessives were designed to tease apart cue-based retrieval interference from encoding interference. The results of all three experiments suggest that there is no evidence that encoding interference affects the retrieval of a reflexive's antecedent. Taken together, these findings suggest that the processing of reflexives can be explained with the same cue-based retrieval mechanism that has been invoked to explain syntactic dependency resolution in a range of other structures. This supports the view that the language processing system is located within a general cognitive architecture, with a general-purpose content-addressable working memory system operating on linguistic expressions. Finally, two experiments (self-paced reading and eye-tracking) using Chinese relative clauses were conducted to determine the relative contribution to sentence processing difficulty of working-memory processes as compared to syntactic prediction during incremental parsing. Chinese has the cross-linguistically rare property of being a language with subject-verb-object word order and pre-nominal relative clauses. This property leads to opposing predictions of expectation-based accounts and memory-based accounts with respect to the relative processing difficulty of subject vs. object relatives. Previous studies showed contradictory results, which has been attributed to different kinds local ambiguities confounding the materials (Lin and Bever, 2011). The two experiments presented are the first to compare Chinese relatives clauses in syntactically unambiguous contexts. The results of both experiments were consistent with the predictions of the expectation-based account of sentence processing but not with the memory-based account. From these findings, I conclude that any theory of human sentence processing needs to take into account the power of predictive processes unfolding in the human mind.}, language = {en} } @article{JaegerBenzRoeseretal.2015, author = {J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Benz, Lena and Roeser, Jens and Dillon, Brian W. and Vasishth, Shravan}, title = {Teasing apart retrieval and encoding interference in the processing of anaphors}, series = {Frontiers in psychology}, volume = {6}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00506}, pages = {18}, year = {2015}, abstract = {Two classes of account have been proposed to explain the memory processes subserving the processing of reflexive-antecedent dependencies. Structure-based accounts assume that the retrieval of the antecedent is guided by syntactic tree-configurational information without considering other kinds of information such as gender marking in the case of English reflexives. By contrast, unconstrained cue-based retrieval assumes that all available information is used for retrieving the antecedent. Similarity-based interference effects from structurally illicit distractors which match a non-structural retrieval cue have been interpreted as evidence favoring the unconstrained cue-based retrieval account since cue-based retrieval interference from structurally illicit distractors is incompatible with the structure-based account. However, it has been argued that the observed effects do not necessarily reflect interference occurring at the moment of retrieval but might equally well be accounted for by interference occurring already at the stage of encoding or maintaining the antecedent in memory, in which case they cannot be taken as evidence against the structure-based account. We present three experiments (self-paced reading and eye-tracking) on German reflexives and Swedish reflexive and pronominal possessives in which we pit the predictions of encoding interference and cue-based retrieval interference against each other. We could not find any indication that encoding interference affects the processing ease of the reflexive-antecedent dependency formation. Thus, there is no evidence that encoding interference might be the explanation for the interference effects observed in previous work. We therefore conclude that invoking encoding interference may not be a plausible way to reconcile interference effects with a structure-based account of reflexive processing.}, language = {en} } @misc{JaegerEngelmannVasishth2015, author = {J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Engelmann, Felix and Vasishth, Shravan}, title = {Retrieval interference in reflexive processing}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-78738}, year = {2015}, abstract = {We conducted two eye-tracking experiments investigating the processing of the Mandarin reflexive ziji in order to tease apart structurally constrained accounts from standard cue-based accounts of memory retrieval. In both experiments, we tested whether structurally inaccessible distractors that fulfill the animacy requirement of ziji influence processing times at the reflexive. In Experiment 1, we manipulated animacy of the antecedent and a structurally inaccessible distractor intervening between the antecedent and the reflexive. In conditions where the accessible antecedent mismatched the animacy cue, we found inhibitory interference whereas in antecedent-match conditions, no effect of the distractor was observed. In Experiment 2, we tested only antecedent-match configurations and manipulated locality of the reflexive-antecedent binding (Mandarin allows non-local binding). Participants were asked to hold three distractors (animate vs. inanimate nouns) in memory while reading the target sentence. We found slower reading times when animate distractors were held in memory (inhibitory interference). Moreover, we replicated the locality effect reported in previous studies. These results are incompatible with structure-based accounts. However, the cue-based ACT-R model of Lewis and Vasishth (2005) cannot explain the observed pattern either. We therefore extend the original ACT-R model and show how this model not only explains the data presented in this article, but is also able to account for previously unexplained patterns in the literature on reflexive processing.}, language = {en} } @misc{JaegerBenzRoeseretal.2015, author = {J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Benz, Lena and Roeser, Jens and Dillon, Brian W. and Vasishth, Shravan}, title = {Teasing apart Retrieval and Encoding Interference in the Processing of Anaphors}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-78714}, year = {2015}, abstract = {Two classes of account have been proposed to explain the memory processes subserving the processing of reflexive-antecedent dependencies. Structure-based accounts assume that the retrieval of the antecedent is guided by syntactic tree-configurational information without considering other kinds of information such as gender marking in the case of English reflexives. By contrast, unconstrained cue-based retrieval assumes that all available information is used for retrieving the antecedent. Similarity-based interference effects from structurally illicit distractors which match a non-structural retrieval cue have been interpreted as evidence favoring the unconstrained cue-based retrieval account since cue-based retrieval interference from structurally illicit distractors is incompatible with the structure-based account. However, it has been argued that the observed effects do not necessarily reflect interference occurring at the moment of retrieval but might equally well be accounted for by interference occurring already at the stage of encoding or maintaining the antecedent in memory, in which case they cannot be taken as evidence against the structure-based account. We present three experiments (self-paced reading and eye-tracking) on German reflexives and Swedish reflexive and pronominal possessives in which we pit the predictions of encoding interference and cue-based retrieval interference against each other. We could not find any indication that encoding interference affects the processing ease of the reflexive-antecedent dependency formation. Thus, there is no evidence that encoding interference might be the explanation for the interference effects observed in previous work. We therefore conclude that invoking encoding interference may not be a plausible way to reconcile interference effects with a structure-based account of reflexive processing.}, language = {en} } @article{JaegerBenzRoeseretal.2015, author = {J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Benz, Lena and Roeser, Jens and Dillon, Brian W. and Vasishth, Shravan}, title = {Teasing apart retrieval and encoding interference in the processing of anaphors}, series = {Frontiers in psychology}, volume = {6}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology}, number = {506}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00506}, year = {2015}, abstract = {Two classes of account have been proposed to explain the memory processes subserving the processing of reflexive-antecedent dependencies. Structure-based accounts assume that the retrieval of the antecedent is guided by syntactic tree-configurational information without considering other kinds of information such as gender marking in the case of English reflexives. By contrast, unconstrained cue-based retrieval assumes that all available information is used for retrieving the antecedent. Similarity-based interference effects from structurally illicit distractors which match a non-structural retrieval cue have been interpreted as evidence favoring the unconstrained cue-based retrieval account since cue-based retrieval interference from structurally illicit distractors is incompatible with the structure-based account. However, it has been argued that the observed effects do not necessarily reflect interference occurring at the moment of retrieval but might equally well be accounted for by interference occurring already at the stage of encoding or maintaining the antecedent in memory, in which case they cannot be taken as evidence against the structure-based account. We present three experiments (self-paced reading and eye-tracking) on German reflexives and Swedish reflexive and pronominal possessives in which we pit the predictions of encoding interference and cue-based retrieval interference against each other. We could not find any indication that encoding interference affects the processing ease of the reflexive-antecedent dependency formation. Thus, there is no evidence that encoding interference might be the explanation for the interference effects observed in previous work. We therefore conclude that invoking encoding interference may not be a plausible way to reconcile interference effects with a structure-based account of reflexive processing.}, language = {en} } @article{JaegerEngelmannVasishth2015, author = {J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Engelmann, Felix and Vasishth, Shravan}, title = {Retrieval interference in reflexive processing}, series = {Frontiers in psychology}, volume = {6}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology}, number = {617}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00617}, year = {2015}, abstract = {We conducted two eye-tracking experiments investigating the processing of the Mandarin reflexive ziji in order to tease apart structurally constrained accounts from standard cue-based accounts of memory retrieval. In both experiments, we tested whether structurally inaccessible distractors that fulfill the animacy requirement of ziji influence processing times at the reflexive. In Experiment 1, we manipulated animacy of the antecedent and a structurally inaccessible distractor intervening between the antecedent and the reflexive. In conditions where the accessible antecedent mismatched the animacy cue, we found inhibitory interference whereas in antecedent-match conditions, no effect of the distractor was observed. In Experiment 2, we tested only antecedent-match configurations and manipulated locality of the reflexive-antecedent binding (Mandarin allows non-local binding). Participants were asked to hold three distractors (animate vs. inanimate nouns) in memory while reading the target sentence. We found slower reading times when animate distractors were held in memory (inhibitory interference). Moreover, we replicated the locality effect reported in previous studies. These results are incompatible with structure-based accounts. However, the cue-based ACT-R model of Lewis and Vasishth (2005) cannot explain the observed pattern either. We therefore extend the original ACT-R model and show how this model not only explains the data presented in this article, but is also able to account for previously unexplained patterns in the literature on reflexive processing.}, language = {en} } @misc{MaruschJaegerNeissetal.2018, author = {Marusch, Tina and J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Neiß, Leander and Burchert, Frank and Nickels, Lyndsey}, title = {Overt language production of German past participles}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {492}, issn = {1866-8364}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-420621}, pages = {21}, year = {2018}, abstract = {We report two experiments and Bayesian modelling of the data collected. In both experiments, participants performed a long-lag primed picture naming task. Black-and-white line drawings were used as targets, which were overtly named by the participants. Their naming latencies were measured. In both experiments, primes consisted of past participle verbs (er tanzt/er hat getanzt "he dances/he has danced") and the relationship between primes and targets was either morphological or unrelated. Experiment 1 additionally had phonologically and semantically related prime-target pairs as well as present tense primes. Both in Experiment 1 and 2, participants showed significantly faster naming latencies for morphologically related targets relative to the unrelated verb primes. In Experiment 1, no priming effects were observed in phonologically and semantically related control conditions. In addition, the production latencies were not influenced by verb type.}, language = {en} } @article{LiehrJaegerKarapanagiotisetal.2019, author = {Liehr, Sascha and J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Karapanagiotis, Christos and Munzenberger, Sven and Kowarik, Stefan}, title = {Real-time dynamic strain sensing in optical fibers using artificial neural networks}, series = {Optics express : the international electronic journal of optics}, volume = {27}, journal = {Optics express : the international electronic journal of optics}, number = {5}, publisher = {Optical Society of America}, address = {Washington}, issn = {1094-4087}, doi = {10.1364/OE.27.007405}, pages = {7405 -- 7425}, year = {2019}, abstract = {We propose to use artificial neural networks (ANNs) for raw measurement data interpolation and signal shift computation and to demonstrate advantages for wavelength-scanning coherent optical time domain reflectometry (WS-COTDR) and dynamic strain distribution measurement along optical fibers. The ANNs are trained with synthetic data to predict signal shifts from wavelength scans. Domain adaptation to measurement data is achieved, and standard correlation algorithms are outperformed. First and foremost, the ANN reduces the data analysis time by more than two orders of magnitude, making it possible for the first time to predict strain in real-time applications using the WS-COTDR approach. Further, strain noise and linearity of the sensor response are improved, resulting in more accurate measurements. ANNs also perform better for low signal-to-noise measurement data, for a reduced length of correlation input (i.e., extended distance range), and for coarser sampling settings (i.e., extended strain scanning range). The general applicability is demonstrated for distributed measurement of ground movement along a dark fiber in a telecom cable. The presented ANN-based techniques can be employed to improve the performance of a wide range of correlation or interpolation problems in fiber sensing data analysis and beyond. (C) 2019 Optical Society of America under the terms of the OSA Open Access Publishing Agreement}, language = {en} } @article{MaruschJaegerNeissetal.2019, author = {Marusch, Tina and J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Neiss, Leander and Burchert, Frank and Nickels, Lyndsey}, title = {Overt language production of German past participles}, series = {Language, cognition and neuroscience}, volume = {34}, journal = {Language, cognition and neuroscience}, number = {3}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {2327-3798}, doi = {10.1080/23273798.2018.1527936}, pages = {289 -- 308}, year = {2019}, abstract = {We report two experiments and Bayesian modelling of the data collected. In both experiments, participants performed a long-lag primed picture naming task. Black-and-white line drawings were used as targets, which were overtly named by the participants. Their naming latencies were measured. In both experiments, primes consisted of past participle verbs (er tanzt/er hat getanzt "he dances/he has danced") and the relationship between primes and targets was either morphological or unrelated. Experiment 1 additionally had phonologically and semantically related prime-target pairs as well as present tense primes. Both in Experiment 1 and 2, participants showed significantly faster naming latencies for morphologically related targets relative to the unrelated verb primes. In Experiment 1, no priming effects were observed in phonologically and semantically related control conditions. In addition, the production latencies were not influenced by verb type.}, language = {en} } @misc{LagoNamystJaegeretal.2019, author = {Lago, Sol and Namyst, Anna and J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Lau, Ellen}, title = {Antecedent access mechanisms in pronoun processing}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {568}, issn = {1866-8364}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43323}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-433237}, pages = {641 -- 661}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Previous cross-modal priming studies showed that lexical decisions to words after a pronoun were facilitated when these words were semantically related to the pronoun's antecedent. These studies suggested that semantic priming effectively measured antecedent retrieval during coreference. We examined whether these effects extended to implicit reading comprehension using the N400 response. The results of three experiments did not yield strong evidence of semantic facilitation due to coreference. Further, the comparison with two additional experiments showed that N400 facilitation effects were reduced in sentences (vs. word pair paradigms) and were modulated by the case morphology of the prime word. We propose that priming effects in cross-modal experiments may have resulted from task-related strategies. More generally, the impact of sentence context and morphological information on priming effects suggests that they may depend on the extent to which the upcoming input is predicted, rather than automatic spreading activation between semantically related words.}, language = {en} } @article{LagoNamystJaegeretal.2019, author = {Lago, Sol and Namyst, Anna and J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Lau, Ellen}, title = {Antecedent access mechanisms in pronoun processing}, series = {Language, cognition and neuroscience}, volume = {34}, journal = {Language, cognition and neuroscience}, number = {5}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {2327-3798}, doi = {10.1080/23273798.2019.1566561}, pages = {641 -- 661}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Previous cross-modal priming studies showed that lexical decisions to words after a pronoun were facilitated when these words were semantically related to the pronoun's antecedent. These studies suggested that semantic priming effectively measured antecedent retrieval during coreference. We examined whether these effects extended to implicit reading comprehension using the N400 response. The results of three experiments did not yield strong evidence of semantic facilitation due to coreference. Further, the comparison with two additional experiments showed that N400 facilitation effects were reduced in sentences (vs. word pair paradigms) and were modulated by the case morphology of the prime word. We propose that priming effects in cross-modal experiments may have resulted from task-related strategies. More generally, the impact of sentence context and morphological information on priming effects suggests that they may depend on the extent to which the upcoming input is predicted, rather than automatic spreading activation between semantically related words.}, language = {en} } @article{JaegerMertzenVanDykeetal.2020, author = {J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Mertzen, Daniela and Van Dyke, Julie A. and Vasishth, Shravan}, title = {Interference patterns in subject-verb agreement and reflexives revisited}, series = {Journal of memory and language}, volume = {111}, journal = {Journal of memory and language}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {San Diego}, issn = {0749-596X}, doi = {10.1016/j.jml.2019.104063}, pages = {21}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Cue-based retrieval theories in sentence processing predict two classes of interference effect: (i) Inhibitory interference is predicted when multiple items match a retrieval cue: cue-overloading leads to an overall slowdown in reading time; and (ii) Facilitatory interference arises when a retrieval target as well as a distractor only partially match the retrieval cues; this partial matching leads to an overall speedup in retrieval time. Inhibitory interference effects are widely observed, but facilitatory interference apparently has an exception: reflexives have been claimed to show no facilitatory interference effects. Because the claim is based on underpowered studies, we conducted a large-sample experiment that investigated both facilitatory and inhibitory interference. In contrast to previous studies, we find facilitatory interference effects in reflexives. We also present a quantitative evaluation of the cue-based retrieval model of Engelmann, Jager, and Vasishth (2019).}, language = {en} }