@article{vonderMalsburgVasishth2013,
  author    = {von der Malsburg, Titus Raban and Vasishth, Shravan},
  title     = {Scanpaths reveal syntactic underspecification and reanalysis strategies},
  series = {Language and cognitive processes},
  volume    = {28},
  journal   = {Language and cognitive processes},
  number    = {10},
  publisher = {Wiley},
  address   = {Hove},
  issn      = {0169-0965},
  doi       = {10.1080/01690965.2012.728232},
  pages     = {1545 -- 1578},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {What theories best characterise the parsing processes triggered upon encountering ambiguity, and what effects do these processes have on eye movement patterns in reading? The present eye-tracking study, which investigated processing of attachment ambiguities of an adjunct in Spanish, suggests that readers sometimes underspecify attachment to save memory resources, consistent with the good-enough account of parsing. Our results confirm a surprising prediction of the good-enough account: high-capacity readers commit to an attachment decision more often than low-capacity participants, leading to more errors and a greater need to reanalyse in garden-path sentences. These results emerged only when we separated functionally different types of regressive eye movements using a scanpath analysis; conventional eye-tracking measures alone would have led to different conclusions. The scanpath analysis also showed that rereading was the dominant strategy for recovering from garden-pathing. Our results may also have broader implications for models of reading processes: reanalysis effects in eye movements occurred late, which suggests that the coupling of oculo-motor control and the parser may not be as tight as assumed in current computational models of eye movement control in reading.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{JacobFelser2016,
  author    = {Jacob, Gunnar and Felser, Claudia},
  title     = {Reanalysis and semantic persistence in native and non-native garden-path recovery},
  series = {The quarterly journal of experimental psychology},
  volume    = {69},
  journal   = {The quarterly journal of experimental psychology},
  publisher = {Nature Publ. Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {1747-0218},
  doi       = {10.1080/17470218.2014.984231},
  pages     = {907 -- 925},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {We report the results from an eye-movement monitoring study investigating how native and non-native speakers of English process temporarily ambiguous sentences such as While the gentleman was eating the burgers were still being reheated in the microwave, in which an initially plausible direct-object analysis is first ruled out by a syntactic disambiguation (were) and also later on by semantic information (being reheated). Both participant groups showed garden-path effects at the syntactic disambiguation, with native speakers showing significantly stronger effects of ambiguity than non-native speakers in later eye-movement measures but equally strong effects in first-pass reading times. Ambiguity effects at the semantic disambiguation and in participants' end-of-trial responses revealed that for both participant groups, the incorrect direct-object analysis was frequently maintained beyond the syntactic disambiguation. The non-native group showed weaker reanalysis effects at the syntactic disambiguation and was more likely to misinterpret the experimental sentences than the native group. Our results suggest that native language (L1) and non-native language (L2) parsing are similar with regard to sensitivity to syntactic and semantic error signals, but different with regard to processes of reanalysis.},
  language  = {en}
}