English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse
  1. View item / 
  2. Item Summary

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
Add to Basket
  DetailsSummary

Released
Journal Article

Retrieval cues and syntactic ambiguity resolution: Speed-accuracy tradeoff evidence

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons198520

Martin,  Andrea E.
Psychology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
Department of Psychology, School of Philosophy, Psychology, and Language Sciences, University of Edinburgh;
Cognition and Perception Program, Department of Psychology, New York University;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)

Martin_McElree_2018.pdf
(Publisher version), 3MB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Martin, A. E., & McElree, B. (2018). Retrieval cues and syntactic ambiguity resolution: Speed-accuracy tradeoff evidence. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/23273798.2018.1427877.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0000-6398-5
Abstract
Language comprehension involves coping with ambiguity and recovering from misanalysis. Syntactic ambiguity resolution is associated with increased reading times, a classic finding that has shaped theories of sentence processing. However, reaction times conflate the time it takes a process to complete with the quality of the behavior-related information available to the system. We therefore used the speed-accuracy tradeoff procedure (SAT) to derive orthogonal estimates of processing time and interpretation accuracy, and tested whether stronger retrieval cues (via semantic relatedness: neighed->horse vs. fell->horse) aid interpretation during recovery. On average, ambiguous sentences took 250ms longer (SAT rate) to interpret than unambiguous controls, demonstrating veridical differences in processing time. Retrieval cues more strongly related to the true subject always increased accuracy, regardless of ambiguity. These findings are consistent with a language processing architecture where cue-driven operations give rise to interpretation, and wherein diagnostic cues aid retrieval, regardless of parsing difficulty or structural uncertainty.