@misc{PaapeNicenboimVasishth2017,
  author    = {Paape, Dario L. J. F. and Nicenboim, Bruno and Vasishth, Shravan},
  title     = {Does antecedent complexity affect ellipsis processing?},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-403373},
  pages     = {29},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {In two self-paced reading experiments, we investigated the effect of changes in antecedent complexity on processing times for ellipsis. Pointer- or "sharing"-based approaches to ellipsis processing (Frazier \& Clifton 2001, 2005; Martin \& McElree 2008) predict no effect of antecedent complexity on reading times at the ellipsis site while other accounts predict increased antecedent complexity to either slow down processing (Murphy 1985) or to speed it up (Hofmeister 2011). Experiment 1 manipulated antecedent complexity and elision, yielding evidence against a speedup at the ellipsis site and in favor of a null effect. In order to investigate possible superficial processing on part of participants, Experiment 2 manipulated the amount of attention required to correctly respond to end-of-sentence comprehension probes, yielding evidence against a complexity-induced slowdown at the ellipsis site. Overall, our results are compatible with pointer-based approaches while casting doubt on the notion that changes antecedent complexity lead to measurable differences in ellipsis processing speed.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{PaapeNicenboimVasishth2017,
  author    = {Paape, Dario L. J. F. and Nicenboim, Bruno and Vasishth, Shravan},
  title     = {Does antecedent complexity affect ellipsis processing?},
  series = {Glossa : a journal of general linguistics},
  volume    = {2},
  journal   = {Glossa : a journal of general linguistics},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Ubiquity Press},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {2397-1835},
  doi       = {10.5334/gjgl.290},
  pages     = {1 -- 29},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {In two self-paced reading experiments, we investigated the effect of changes in antecedent complexity on processing times for ellipsis. Pointer- or "sharing"-based approaches to ellipsis processing (Frazier \& Clifton 2001, 2005; Martin \& McElree 2008) predict no effect of antecedent complexity on reading times at the ellipsis site while other accounts predict increased antecedent complexity to either slow down processing (Murphy 1985) or to speed it up (Hofmeister 2011). Experiment 1 manipulated antecedent complexity and elision, yielding evidence against a speedup at the ellipsis site and in favor of a null effect. In order to investigate possible superficial processing on part of participants, Experiment 2 manipulated the amount of attention required to correctly respond to end-of-sentence comprehension probes, yielding evidence against a complexity-induced slowdown at the ellipsis site. Overall, our results are compatible with pointer-based approaches while casting doubt on the notion that changes antecedent complexity lead to measurable differences in ellipsis processing speed.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{PaapeHemforthVasishth2018,
  author    = {Paape, Dario L. J. F. and Hemforth, Barbara and Vasishth, Shravan},
  title     = {Processing of ellipsis with garden-path antecedents in French and German},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {452},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-414062},
  pages     = {46},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {In a self-paced reading study on German sluicing, Paape (Paape, 2016) found that reading times were shorter at the ellipsis site when the antecedent was a temporarily ambiguous garden-path structure. As a post-hoc explanation of this finding, Paape assumed that the antecedent's memory representation was reactivated during syntactic reanalysis, making it easier to retrieve. In two eye tracking experiments, we subjected the reactivation hypothesis to further empirical scrutiny. Experiment 1, carried out in French, showed no evidence in favor in the reactivation hypothesis. Instead, results for one out of the three types of garden-path sentences that were tested suggest that subjects sometimes failed to resolve the temporary ambiguity in the antecedent clause, and subsequently failed to resolve the ellipsis. The results of Experiment 2, a conceptual replication of Paape's (Paape, 2016) original study carried out in German, are compatible with the reactivation hypothesis, but leave open the possibility that the observed speedup for ambiguous antecedents may be due to occasional retrievals of an incorrect structure.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{PaapeVasishth2016,
  author    = {Paape, Dario L. J. F. and Vasishth, Shravan},
  title     = {Local coherence and preemptive digging-in effects in German},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {417},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-405337},
  pages     = {17},
  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{PaapeHemforthVasishth2018,
  author    = {Paape, Dario L. J. F. and Hemforth, Barbara and Vasishth, Shravan},
  title     = {Processing of ellipsis with garden-path antecedents in French and German},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {13},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {6},
  publisher = {PLOS},
  address   = {San Francisco},
  issn      = {1932-6203},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0198620},
  pages     = {1 -- 46},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {In a self-paced reading study on German sluicing, Paape (Paape, 2016) found that reading times were shorter at the ellipsis site when the antecedent was a temporarily ambiguous garden-path structure. As a post-hoc explanation of this finding, Paape assumed that the antecedent's memory representation was reactivated during syntactic reanalysis, making it easier to retrieve. In two eye tracking experiments, we subjected the reactivation hypothesis to further empirical scrutiny. Experiment 1, carried out in French, showed no evidence in favor in the reactivation hypothesis. Instead, results for one out of the three types of garden-path sentences that were tested suggest that subjects sometimes failed to resolve the temporary ambiguity in the antecedent clause, and subsequently failed to resolve the ellipsis. The results of Experiment 2, a conceptual replication of Paape's (Paape, 2016) original study carried out in German, are compatible with the reactivation hypothesis, but leave open the possibility that the observed speedup for ambiguous antecedents may be due to occasional retrievals of an incorrect structure.},
  language  = {en}
}