@article{GotznerSpalek2022,
  author    = {Gotzner, Nicole and Spalek, Katharina},
  title     = {Expectations about upcoming discourse referents},
  series = {International review of pragmatics : IRP},
  volume    = {14},
  journal   = {International review of pragmatics : IRP},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Brill},
  address   = {Leiden},
  issn      = {1877-3095},
  doi       = {10.1163/18773109-01401003},
  pages     = {77 -- 94},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {In the current study, we explore how different information-structural devices affect which referents conversational partners expect in the upcoming discourse. Our main research question is how pitch accents (H*, L+H*) and focus particles (German nur `only' and auch 'also') affect speakers' choices to mention focused referents, previously mentioned alternatives or new, inferable alternatives. Participants in our experiment were presented with short discourses involving two referents and were asked to orally produce two sentences that continue the story. An analysis of speakers' continuations showed that participants were most likely to mention a contextual alternative in the condition with only and the L+H* conditions, followed by H* conditions. In the condition with also, in turn, participants mentioned both the focused/accented referent and the contextual alternative. Our findings highlight the importance of information structure for discourse management and suggest that speakers take activated alternatives to be relevant for an unfolding discourse.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BurmesterSauermannSpaleketal.2018,
  author    = {Burmester, Juliane and Sauermann, Antje and Spalek, Katharina and Wartenburger, Isabell},
  title     = {Sensitivity to salience},
  series = {Language, cognition and neuroscience},
  volume    = {33},
  journal   = {Language, cognition and neuroscience},
  number    = {6},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {2327-3798},
  doi       = {10.1080/23273798.2018.1428758},
  pages     = {784 -- 801},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Sentence comprehension is optimised by indicating entities as salient through linguistic (i.e., information-structural) or visual means. We compare how salience of a depicted referent due to a linguistic (i.e., topic status) or visual cue (i.e., a virtual person's gaze shift) modulates sentence comprehension in German. We investigated processing of sentences with varying word order and pronoun resolution by means of self-paced reading and an antecedent choice task, respectively. Our results show that linguistic as well as visual salience cues immediately speeded up reading times of sentences mentioning the salient referent first. In contrast, for pronoun resolution, linguistic and visual cues modulated antecedent choice preferences less congruently. In sum, our findings speak in favour of a significant impact of linguistic and visual salience cues on sentence comprehension, substantiating that salient information delivered via language as well as the visual environment is integrated in the current mental representation of the discourse.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{CzypionkaSpalekWartenburgeretal.2017,
  author    = {Czypionka, Anna and Spalek, Katharina and Wartenburger, Isabell and Krifka, Manfred},
  title     = {On the interplay of object animacy and verb type during sentence comprehension in German: ERP evidence from the processing of transitive dative and accusative constructions},
  series = {Linguistics : an interdisciplinary journal of the language sciences},
  volume    = {55},
  journal   = {Linguistics : an interdisciplinary journal of the language sciences},
  publisher = {De Gruyter Mouton},
  address   = {Berlin},
  issn      = {0024-3949},
  doi       = {10.1515/ling-2017-0031},
  pages     = {1383 -- 1433},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {Comprehension of transitive sentences relies on different kinds of information, like word order, case marking, and animacy contrasts between arguments. When no formal cues like case marking or number congruency are available, a contrast in animacy helps the parser to decide which argument is the grammatical subject and which the object. Processing costs are enhanced when neither formal cues nor animacy contrasts are available in a transitive sentence. We present an ERP study on the comprehension of grammatical transitive German sentences, manipulating animacy contrasts between subjects and objects as well as the verbal case marking pattern. Our study shows strong object animacy effects even in the absence of violations, and in addition suggests that this effect of object animacy is modulated by the verbal case marking pattern.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GotznerWartenburgerSpalek2016,
  author    = {Gotzner, Nicole and Wartenburger, Isabell and Spalek, Katharina},
  title     = {The impact of focus particles on the recognition and rejection of contrastive alternatives},
  series = {Language and cognition : an interdisciplinary journal of language and cognitive science},
  volume    = {8},
  journal   = {Language and cognition : an interdisciplinary journal of language and cognitive science},
  publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press},
  address   = {Cambridge},
  issn      = {1866-9808},
  doi       = {10.1017/langcog.2015.25},
  pages     = {59 -- 95},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {The semantics of focus particles like only requires a set of alternatives (Rooth, 1992). In two experiments, we investigated the impact of such particles on the retrieval of alternatives that are mentioned in the prior context or unmentioned. The first experiment used a probe recognition task and showed that focus particles interfere with the recognition of mentioned alternatives and the rejection of unmentioned alternatives relative to a condition without a particle. A second lexical decision experiment demonstrated priming effects for mentioned and unmentioned alternatives (compared with an unrelated condition) while focus particles caused additional interference effects. Overall, our results indicate that focus particles trigger an active search for alternatives and lead to a competition between mentioned alternatives, unmentioned alternatives, and the focused element.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{GotznerWartenburgerSpalek2016,
  author    = {Gotzner, Nicole and Wartenburger, Isabell and Spalek, Katharina},
  title     = {The impact of focus particles on the recognition and rejection of contrastive alternatives},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {517},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-41342},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-413420},
  pages     = {37},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {The semantics of focus particles like only requires a set of alternatives (Rooth, 1992). In two experiments, we investigated the impact of such particles on the retrieval of alternatives that are mentioned in the prior context or unmentioned. The first experiment used a probe recognition task and showed that focus particles interfere with the recognition of mentioned alternatives and the rejection of unmentioned alternatives relative to a condition without a particle. A second lexical decision experiment demonstrated priming effects for mentioned and unmentioned alternatives (compared with an unrelated condition) while focus particles caused additional interference effects. Overall, our results indicate that focus particles trigger an active search for alternatives and lead to a competition between mentioned alternatives, unmentioned alternatives, and the focused element.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{BurmesterSauermannSpaleketal.2018,
  author    = {Burmester, Juliane and Sauermann, Antje and Spalek, Katharina and Wartenburger, Isabell},
  title     = {Sensitivity to salience},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {454},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-412838},
  pages     = {19},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Sentence comprehension is optimised by indicating entities as salient through linguistic (i.e., information-structural) or visual means. We compare how salience of a depicted referent due to a linguistic (i.e., topic status) or visual cue (i.e., a virtual person's gaze shift) modulates sentence comprehension in German. We investigated processing of sentences with varying word order and pronoun resolution by means of self-paced reading and an antecedent choice task, respectively. Our results show that linguistic as well as visual salience cues immediately speeded up reading times of sentences mentioning the salient referent first. In contrast, for pronoun resolution, linguistic and visual cues modulated antecedent choice preferences less congruently. In sum, our findings speak in favour of a significant impact of linguistic and visual salience cues on sentence comprehension, substantiating that salient information delivered via language as well as the visual environment is integrated in the current mental representation of the discourse.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SpalekGotznerWartenburger2014,
  author    = {Spalek, Katharina and Gotzner, Nicole and Wartenburger, Isabell},
  title     = {Not only the apples},
  series = {Journal of memory and language : JML},
  volume    = {70},
  journal   = {Journal of memory and language : JML},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {San Diego},
  issn      = {0749-596X},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.jml.2013.09.001},
  pages     = {68 -- 84},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {Focus sensitive particles highlight the relevance of contextual alternatives for the interpretation of a sentence. Two experiments tested whether this leads to better encoding and therefore, ultimately, better recall of focus alternatives. Participants were presented with auditory stimuli that introduced a set of elements ("context sentence") and continued in three different versions: the critical sentences either contained the exclusive particle nur ("only"), the inclusive particle sogar ("even"), or no particle (control condition). After being exposed to blocks of ten trials, participants were asked to recall the elements in the context sentence. The results show that both particles enhanced memory performance for the alternatives to the focused element, relative to the control condition. The results support the assumption that information-structural alternatives are better encoded in memory in the presence of a focus sensitive particle.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BurmesterSpalekWartenburger2014,
  author    = {Burmester, Juliane and Spalek, Katharina and Wartenburger, Isabell},
  title     = {Context updating during sentence comprehension: The effect of aboutness topic},
  series = {Brain \& language : a journal of the neurobiology of language},
  volume    = {137},
  journal   = {Brain \& language : a journal of the neurobiology of language},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {San Diego},
  issn      = {0093-934X},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.bandl.2014.08.001},
  pages     = {62 -- 76},
  year      = {2014},
  language  = {en}
}