The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A critique of top-down independent levels models of speech production: Evidence from non-plan-internal speech errors
Open accessAbstract
A number of speech errors are examined which are difficult to account for by top-down serial processing models of speech production which hove independent levels of processing. In particular, most of these errors are characterized by the presence of an interfering element which is external to the utterance under current construction. This paper has two main aims: to classify these errors, and to examine the constraints upon them. It is found that phonological similarity between the target and intrusion is a major determinant of error occurrence. The consequences for models of speech production are discussed in a framework consisting of the architecture and control structure of those models. A particular model to account for these data is proposed, consisting of a spreading activation lexical network.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Grice, H. P. (1975) · Speech Acts · doi:10.1163/9789004368811_003 · Cited by 23,221
Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions
Stroop, J. R. (1935) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0054651 · Cited by 18,622
Categorization of action slips
Norman, D. A. (1981) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.88.1.1 · Cited by 1,736 · cited 1×
“To some extent it is a residual class of cognitive intrusions (see Norman, 1981).”
BackgroundStudies of interference in serial verbal reactions.
Stroop, J. R. (1992) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.121.1.15 · Cited by 918
Cited by
A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production.
Dell, G. S. (1986) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037//0033-295x.93.3.283 · Cited by 3,236
Syntactic persistence in language production
Bock, J. K. (1986) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(86)90004-6 · Cited by 1,911
Accessing words in speech production: Stages, processes and representations
Levelt, W. J. M. (1992) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(92)90038-j · Cited by 709
The WEAVER model of word-form encoding in speech production
Roelofs, A. (1997) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(97)00027-9 · Cited by 561
Connectionist Models of Language Production: Lexical Access and Grammatical Encoding
Dell, G. S., Chang, F., & Griffin, Z. M. (1999) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1016/s0364-0213(99)00014-2 · Cited by 339
Metadata
- Authors
- HARLEY, T.
- Venue
- Cognitive Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1984-09
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 191-219
- ISSN
- 0364-0213 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2137870053
- Cited by
- 267
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 8.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A critique of top-down independent levels models of speech production: Evidence from non-plan-internal speech errors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0364-0213(84)80001-4
- The paper
- HARLEY, T. (1984). A critique of top-down independent levels models of speech production: Evidence from non-plan-internal speech errors. Cognitive Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0364-0213(84)80001-4
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
