| Title |
A Hierarchical Linear Modeling Analysis of Working Memory and Implicit Prosody in the Resolution of Adjunct Attachment Ambiguity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, April 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10936-009-9102-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matthew J. Traxler |
| Abstract |
An eye-movement monitoring experiment investigated readers' response to temporarily ambiguous sentences. The sentences were ambiguous because a relative clause could attach to one of two preceding nouns. Semantic information disambiguated the sentences. Working memory considerations predict an overall preference for the second of the two nouns, as does the late closure principle (Frazier, On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut. West Bend, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club, 1979). Previous studies assessing preferences for such items have obtained mixed results. On-line assessments show that working memory affects the degree of preference for the first noun, with lower capacity readers having a greater preference for the second noun (Felser et al., Language Acquisition: A Journal of Developmental Linguistics, 11, 127-163, 2003; Traxler, Memory & Cognition, 35, 1107-1121, 2007). Off-line assessments indicate the opposite pattern of preferences when the test sentences are displayed on a single line (Swets et al., Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 64-81, 2007). However, when implicit prosody is manipulated by displaying the sentences with a break between the second noun and the relative clause, the off-line assessments indicate that readers prefer to attach the relative clause to the first noun. In this experiment, readers' undertook a working memory assessment and then read test sentences that were displayed across two lines, with a break appearing after the second noun and before the relative clause. The eye-tracking data indicated an overall preference to attach the relative clause to the first noun, and there was little indication that working memory moderated the degree of preference for this configuration. Hence, it appears that readers' implicit prosodic contours rapidly affect resolution of adjunct attachment ambiguities. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 4% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| China | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 69 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 11% |
| Professor | 7 | 9% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 14 | 18% |
| Unknown | 9 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Linguistics | 28 | 37% |
| Psychology | 22 | 29% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 12 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 May 2014.
All research outputs
#15,301,167
of 22,756,196 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Psycholinguistic Research
#173
of 354 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,567
of 93,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Psycholinguistic Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,756,196 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 354 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 93,074 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them