@article{SchefflerBrandtdelaFuenteetal.2022,
  author    = {Scheffler, Tatjana and Brandt, Lasse and de la Fuente, Marie and Nenchev, Ivan},
  title     = {Stimulus data and experimental design for a self-paced reading study on emoji-word substitutions},
  series = {Data in Brief},
  volume    = {43},
  journal   = {Data in Brief},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {2352-3409},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.dib.2022.108399},
  pages     = {7},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {This data paper presents the experimental design and stimuli from an online self-paced reading study on the processing of emojis substituting lexically ambiguous nouns. We recorded reading times for the target ambiguous nouns and for emojis depicting either the intended target referent or a contextually inappropriate homophonous noun. Furthermore, we recorded comprehension accuracy, demographics and a self-assessment of the participants' emoji usage frequency. The data includes all stimuli used, the raw data, the full JavaScript code for the online experiment, as well as Python and R code for the data analysis. We believe that our dataset may give important insights related to the comprehension mechanisms involved in the cognitive processing of emojis. For interpretation and discussion of the experiment, please see the original article entitled "The processing of emoji-word substitutions: A self-paced-reading study".},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{PattersonFelser2019,
  author    = {Patterson, Clare and Felser, Claudia},
  title     = {Delayed Application of Binding Condition C During Cataphoric Pronoun Resolution},
  series = {Journal of Psycholinguistic Research},
  volume    = {48},
  journal   = {Journal of Psycholinguistic Research},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {0090-6905},
  doi       = {10.1007/s10936-018-9613-4},
  pages     = {453 -- 475},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Previous research has shown that during cataphoric pronoun resolution, the predictive search for an antecedent is restricted by a structure-sensitive constraint known as 'Condition C', such that an antecedent is only considered when the constraint does not apply. Evidence has mainly come from self-paced reading (SPR), a method which may not be able to pick up on short-lived effects over the timecourse of processing. This study investigates whether or not the active search mechanism is constrained by Condition C at all points in time during cataphoric processing. We carried out one eye-tracking during reading and a parallel SPR experiment, accompanied by offline coreference judgment tasks. Although offline judgments about coreference were constrained by Condition C, the eye-tracking experiment revealed temporary consideration of antecedents that should be ruled out by Condition C. The SPR experiment using exactly the same materials indicated, conversely, that only structurally appropriate antecedents were considered. Taken together, our results suggest that the application of Condition C may be delayed during naturalistic reading.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{PaapeAvetisyanLagoetal.2021,
  author    = {Paape, Dario and Avetisyan, Serine and Lago, Sol and Vasishth, Shravan},
  title     = {Modeling misretrieval and feature substitution in agreement attraction},
  series = {Cognitive science},
  volume    = {45},
  journal   = {Cognitive science},
  number    = {8},
  publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  address   = {Malden, Mass.},
  issn      = {0364-0213},
  doi       = {10.1111/cogs.13019},
  pages     = {30},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {We present computational modeling results based on a self-paced reading study investigating number attraction effects in Eastern Armenian. We implement three novel computational models of agreement attraction in a Bayesian framework and compare their predictive fit to the data using k-fold cross-validation. We find that our data are better accounted for by an encoding-based model of agreement attraction, compared to a retrieval-based model. A novel methodological contribution of our study is the use of comprehension questions with open-ended responses, so that both misinterpretation of the number feature of the subject phrase and misassignment of the thematic subject role of the verb can be investigated at the same time. We find evidence for both types of misinterpretation in our study, sometimes in the same trial. However, the specific error patterns in our data are not fully consistent with any previously proposed model.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Michl2019,
  author    = {Michl, Diana},
  title     = {Speedy Metonymy, Tricky Metaphor, Irrelevant Compositionality: How Nonliteralness Affects Idioms in Reading and Rating},
  series = {Journal of psycholinguistic research},
  volume    = {48},
  journal   = {Journal of psycholinguistic research},
  number    = {6},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {0090-6905},
  doi       = {10.1007/s10936-019-09658-7},
  pages     = {1285 -- 1310},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {It is widely acknowledged that fixed expressions such as idioms have a processing advantage over non-idiomatic language. While many idioms are metaphoric, metonymic, or even literal, the effect of varying nonliteralness in their processing has not been much researched yet. Theoretical and empirical findings suggest that metonymies are easier to process than metaphors but it is unclear whether this applies to idioms. Two self-paced reading experiments test whether metonymic, metaphoric, or literal idioms have a greater processing advantage over non-idiomatic control sentences, and whether this is caused by varying nonliteralness. Both studies find that metonymic and literal idioms are read significantly faster than controls, while the advantage for metaphoric idioms is only tenuous. Only experiment 2 finds literal idioms to be read fastest of all. As compositionality of the idioms cannot account for these findings, some effect of nonliteralness is suggested, together with idiomaticity and the sentential context.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FrankTrompenaarsVasishth2016,
  author    = {Frank, Stefan L. and Trompenaars, Thijs and Vasishth, Shravan},
  title     = {Cross-Linguistic Differences in Processing Double-Embedded Relative Clauses: Working-Memory Constraints or Language Statistics?},
  series = {Cognitive science : a multidisciplinary journal of anthropology, artificial intelligence, education, linguistics, neuroscience, philosophy, psychology ; journal of the Cognitive Science Society},
  volume    = {40},
  journal   = {Cognitive science : a multidisciplinary journal of anthropology, artificial intelligence, education, linguistics, neuroscience, philosophy, psychology ; journal of the Cognitive Science Society},
  publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {0364-0213},
  doi       = {10.1111/cogs.12247},
  pages     = {554 -- 578},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {An English double-embedded relative clause from which the middle verb is omitted can often be processed more easily than its grammatical counterpart, a phenomenon known as the grammaticality illusion. This effect has been found to be reversed in German, suggesting that the illusion is language specific rather than a consequence of universal working memory constraints. We present results from three self-paced reading experiments which show that Dutch native speakers also do not show the grammaticality illusion in Dutch, whereas both German and Dutch native speakers do show the illusion when reading English sentences. These findings provide evidence against working memory constraints as an explanation for the observed effect in English. We propose an alternative account based on the statistical patterns of the languages involved. In support of this alternative, a single recurrent neural network model that is trained on both Dutch and English sentences is shown to predict the cross-linguistic difference in the grammaticality effect.},
  language  = {en}
}