CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,047Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationLanguage Development and Disorders

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Structural priming: A critical review.

Open access
Pickering, Martin J., Ferreira, Victor S.·2008·Psychological Bulletin
DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.134.3.427PMC PMC2657366
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Repetition is a central phenomenon of behavior, and researchers have made extensive use of it to illuminate psychological functioning. In the language sciences, a ubiquitous form of such repetition is structural priming, a tendency to repeat or better process a current sentence because of its structural similarity to a previously experienced ("prime") sentence (J. K. Bock, 1986). The recent explosion of research in structural priming has made it the dominant means of investigating the processes involved in the production (and increasingly, comprehension) of complex expressions such as sentences. This review considers its implications for the representation of syntax and the mechanisms of production and comprehension and their relationship. It then addresses the potential functions of structural priming, before turning to its implications for first language acquisition, bilingualism, and aphasia. The authors close with theoretical and empirical recommendations for future investigations.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0033-2909.134.3.427

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 201

  1. Altmann GTM, Kamide Y. Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition. 1999;73:247–264. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0277(99)00059-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  2. Arai M, Van Gompel RPG, Scheepers C. Priming ditransitive structures in comprehension. Cognitive Psychology. 2007;54:218–250. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.07.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  3. Barr DJ. Establishing conventional communication systems: Is common knowledge necessary? Cognitive Science. 2004;28:937–962. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bates E, MacWhinney B. Functionalist approaches to grammar. In: Wanner E, Gleitman LR, editors. Language acquisition: The state of the art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1982. pp. 173–218. [Google Scholar]
  5. Berndt RS. Sentence production. In: Rapp B, editor. The handbook of cognitive neuropsychology: What deficits reveal about the human mind. New York: Psychology Press; 2001. pp. 375–396. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bernolet S, Hartsuiker RJ, Pickering MJ. Shared syntactic representations in bilinguals: Evidence for the role of word-order repetition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2007;33:931–949. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.5.931. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  7. Bever TG, McElree B. Empty categories access their antecedent during comprehension. Linguistic Inquiry. 1988;19:35–43. [Google Scholar]
  8. Biber D. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1988. [Google Scholar]
  9. Bock JK. Syntactic persistence in language production. Cognitive Psychology. 1986;18:355–387. [Google Scholar]
  10. Bock JK. Coordinating words and syntax in speech plans. In: Ellis A, editor. Progress in the psychology of language. Vol. 3. London: Erlbaum; 1987. pp. 337–390. [Google Scholar]
  11. Bock K. Closed-class immanence in sentence production. Cognition. 1989;31:163–186. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(89)90022-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  12. Bock K. Structure in language: Creating form in talk. American Psychologist. 1990;11:1221–1236. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.45.11.1221. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  13. Bock K, Dell GS, Chang F, Onishi KH. Persistent structural priming from language comprehension to language production. Cognition. 2007;104:437–458. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.07.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  14. Bock K, Griffin ZM. The persistence of structural priming: Transient activation or implicit learning? Journal of Experimental: General. 2000;129:177–192. doi: 10.1037//0096-3445.129.2.177. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  15. Bock JK, Kroch AS. The isolability of syntactic processing. In: Carlson GN, Tanenhaus MK, editors. Linguistic structure in language processing. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer; 1989. pp. 157–196. [Google Scholar]
  16. Bock K, Loebell H. Framing sentences. Cognition. 1990;35:1–39. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(90)90035-i. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  17. Bock K, Loebell H, Morey R. From conceptual roles to structural relations: Bridging the syntactic cleft. Psychological Review. 1992;99:150–171. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.99.1.150. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  18. Branigan HP, McLean JF, Jones MW. A blue cat or a cat that is blue? Evidence for abstract syntax in young children’s noun phrases. In: Brugos A, Clark-Cotton MR, Ha S, editors. The proceedings of the 29th annual Boston University conference on language development. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press; 2005. pp. 109–121. [Google Scholar]
  19. Branigan HP, Pickering MJ, Cleland AA. Syntactic priming in written production: Evidence for rapid decay. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 1999;6:635–640. doi: 10.3758/bf03212972. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  20. Branigan HP, Pickering MJ, Cleland AA. Syntactic co-ordination in dialogue. Cognition. 2000a;75:B13–B25. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0277(99)00081-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  21. Branigan HP, Pickering MJ, Liversedge SP, Stewart AJ, Urbach TP. Syntactic priming – Investigating the mental representation of language. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 1995;24:489–506. [Google Scholar]
  22. Branigan HP, Pickering MJ, McLean JF. Priming prepositional-phrase attachment during language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2005;31:468–481. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.31.3.468. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  23. Branigan HP, Pickering MJ, McLean JF, Cleland AA. Syntactic alignment and participant role in dialogue. Cognition. 2007;104:163–197. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.05.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  24. Branigan HP, Pickering MJ, McLean JF, Stewart AJ. The role of global and local syntactic structure in language production: Evidence from syntactic priming. Language and Cognitive Processes. 2006;21:974–1010. [Google Scholar]
  25. Branigan HP, Pickering MJ, Stewart AJ, McLean JF. Syntactic priming in spoken production: Linguistic and temporal interference. Memory & Cognition. 2000b;28:1297–1302. doi: 10.3758/bf03211830. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  26. Branigan HP, Pickering MJ, Tanaka M. Contributions of animacy to grammatical function assignment and word order during production. Lingua. 2008;118:172–189. [Google Scholar]
  27. Brennan SE, Clark HH. Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 1996;22:1482–1493. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.22.6.1482. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  28. Bresnan J, Kaplan RM. Introduction: Grammars as mental representations of language. In: Bresnan J, editor. The mental representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1982. pp. xvii–lii. [Google Scholar]
  29. Brooks PJ, Tomasello M. Young children learn to produce passives with nonce verbs. Developmental Psychology. 1999;35:29–44. doi: 10.1037//0012-1649.35.1.29. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  30. Bühler K. Sprachtheorie. Jena, Germany: Fischer Verlag; 1934. [Google Scholar]
  31. Cameron R, Flores-Ferrán N. Perseveration of subject expression across regional dialects of Spanish. Spanish in Context. 2004;1:41–65. [Google Scholar]
  32. Caramazza A, Hillis AE. Lexical organization of nouns and verbs in the brain. Nature. 1991;349:788–790. doi: 10.1038/349788a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  33. Carey PW, Mehler J, Bever TG. Judging the veracity of ambiguous sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 1970;9:243–254. [Google Scholar]
  34. Carlson K. The effects of parallelism and prosody in the processing of gapping structures. Language and Speech. 2001;44:1–26. doi: 10.1177/00238309010440010101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  35. Chambers CG, Smyth R. Structural parallelism and discourse coherence: A test of centering theory. Journal of Memory and Language. 1998;39:593–608. [Google Scholar]
  36. Chang F. Symbolically speaking: A connectionist model of sentence production. Cognitive Science. 2002;26:609–651. [Google Scholar]
  37. Chang F, Bock JK, Goldberg A. Can thematic roles leave traces of their places? Cognition. 2003;90:29–49. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0277(03)00123-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  38. Chang F, Dell GS, Bock K. Becoming syntactic. Psychological Review. 2006;113:234–272. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.113.2.234. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  39. Chang F, Dell GS, Bock JK, Griffin ZM. Structural priming as implicit learning: A comparison of models of sentence production. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 2000;29:217–229. doi: 10.1023/a:1005101313330. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  40. Chomsky N. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris; 1981. [Google Scholar]
  41. Chomsky N. Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New York: Praeger; 1986. [Google Scholar]
  42. Christianson K, Hollingworth A, Halliwell JF, Ferreira F. Thematic roles assigned along the garden path linger. Cognitive Psychology. 2001;42:368–407. doi: 10.1006/cogp.2001.0752. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  43. Christianson K, Ferreira F. Conceptual accessibility and sentence production in a free word-order language (Odawa) Cognition. 2005;98:105–135. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.10.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  44. Clark E. The principle of contrast: A constraint on language acquisition. In: MacWhinney B, editor. Mechanisms of language acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1987. pp. 1–33. [Google Scholar]
  45. Clark HH. Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996. [Google Scholar]
  46. Cleland AA, Pickering MJ. The use of lexical and syntactic information in language production: Evidence from the priming of noun-phrase structure. Journal of Memory and Language. 2003;49:214–230. [Google Scholar]
  47. Cleland AA, Pickering MJ. Do writing and speaking employ the same syntactic representations? Journal of Memory and Language. 2006;54:185–198. [Google Scholar]
  48. Corley M, Scheepers C. Syntactic priming in English sentence production: Categorical and latency evidence from an internet-based study. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2002;9:126–131. doi: 10.3758/bf03196267. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  49. Culicover PW, Jackendoff R. Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  50. Cuetos F, Mitchell DC. Cross-linguistic differences in parsing: Restrictions on the use of the late closure strategy in Spanish. Cognition. 1988;30:73–105. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(88)90004-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  51. Cuetos F, Mitchell DC, Corley MMB. Parsing in different languages. In: Carreiras M, Garca-Albea J, Sabastian-Galles N, editors. Language processing in Spanish. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 1996. pp. 145–187. [Google Scholar]
  52. Desmet T, Declercq M. Cross-linguistic priming of syntactic hierarchical configuration information. Journal of Memory and Language. 2006;54:610–632. [Google Scholar]
  53. Deutsch A, Bentin S. Attention mechanisms mediate the syntactic priming effect in auditory word identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 1994;34:595–607. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.20.3.595. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  54. Dooling DJ. Rhythm and syntax in sentence perception. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 1974;13:255–264. [Google Scholar]
  55. Estes Z. Attributive and relational processes in nominal combination. Journal of Memory and Language. 2003;48:299–349. [Google Scholar]
  56. Estes Z, Jones LL. Priming via relational similarity: A copper horse is faster when seen through a glass eye. Journal of Memory and Language. 2006;55:89–101. [Google Scholar]
  57. Estival D. Syntactic priming of the passive in English. Text. 1985;5:7–21. [Google Scholar]
  58. Ferreira F, Clifton C. The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language. 1986;25:348–368. [Google Scholar]
  59. Ferreira VS. The persistence of optional complementizer production: Why saying ‘that’ is not saying ‘that’ at all. Journal of Memory and Language. 2003;48:379–398. [Google Scholar]
  60. Ferreira VS, Bock JK, Wilson M, Cohen NJ. Structural persistence in anterograde amnesia: Evidence for implicit learning. Paper presented at the 46th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society; Toronto, Canada. 2005. [Google Scholar]
  61. Fisher C. The role of abstract syntactic knowledge in language acquisition: A reply to Tomasello (2000) Cognition. 2002;82:259–278. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0277(01)00159-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  62. Fodor JA, Bever TG, Garrett MF. The psychology of language. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1974. [Google Scholar]
  63. Ford M. Sentence planning units: Implications for the speaker’s representation of meaningful relations underlying sentences. In: Bresnan J, editor. The mental representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1982. pp. 797–827. [Google Scholar]
  64. Ford M, Holmes VM. Planning units and syntax in sentence production. Cognition. 1978;6:35–53. [Google Scholar]
  65. Fox Tree JE, Meijer PJA. Building syntactic structure in speaking. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 1999;28:71–90. doi: 10.1023/a:1023239604158. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  66. Frazier L. Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In: Coltheart M, editor. Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum; 1987. pp. 559–586. [Google Scholar]
  67. Frazier L, Fodor JD. The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition. 1978;6:291–325. [Google Scholar]
  68. Frazier L, Munn A, Clifton C., Jr Processing coordinate structures. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 2000;29:343–371. doi: 10.1023/a:1005156427600. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  69. Frazier L, Rayner K. Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology. 1982;14:178–210. [Google Scholar]
  70. Frazier L, Taft L, Clifton C, Roeper T, Ehrlich K. Parallel structure: A source of facilitation in sentence comprehension. Memory & Cognition. 1984;12:421–430. doi: 10.3758/bf03198303. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  71. Frisch S, beim Graben P, Schlesewsky M. Parallelizing grammatical functions: P600 and P345 reflect different costs of reanalysis. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos. 2004;14:531–549. [Google Scholar]
  72. Gagné CL. Relation and lexical priming during the interpretation of noun-noun combinations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2001;27:236–254. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Gagné CL. Lexical and relational influences on the processing of novel compounds. Brain and Language. 2002;81:723–735. doi: 10.1006/brln.2001.2559. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  74. Gagné CL, Shoben EJ. Priming relations in ambiguous noun-noun combinations. Memory & Cognition. 2002;30:637–646. doi: 10.3758/bf03194965. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  75. Gagné CL, Spalding TL, Ji H. Re-examining evidence for the use of independent relational representations during conceptual combination. Journal of Memory and Language. 2005;53:445–455. [Google Scholar]
  76. Galantucci B. An experimental study of the emergence of human communication systems. Cognitive Science. 2005;29:737–767. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  77. Garrett MF. The analysis of sentence production. In: Bower GH, editor. The psychology of learning and motivation. Vol. 9. New York: Academic Press; 1975. pp. 133–177. [Google Scholar]
  78. Garrod S, Anderson A. Saying what you mean in dialogue: A study in conceptual and semantic co-ordination. Cognition. 1987;27:181–218. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(87)90018-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  79. Garrod S, Clark A. The development of dialogue co-ordination skills in schoolchildren. Language and Cognitive Processes. 1993;8:101–126. [Google Scholar]
  80. Garrod S, Doherty G. Conversation, co-ordination and convention: An empirical investigation of how groups establish linguistic conventions. Cognition. 1994;53:181–215. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90048-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  81. Garrod S, Pickering MJ. Why is conversation so easy? Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2004;8:8–11. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2003.10.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  82. Gazdar G, Klein E, Pullum G, Sag I. Generalized phrase structure grammar. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1985. [Google Scholar]
  83. Giles H, Coupland N, Coupland J. Accomodation theory: Communication, context and consequences. In: Giles H, Coupland J, Coupland N, editors. Contexts of accommodation: Developments in applied sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991. pp. 1–68. [Google Scholar]
  84. Goldberg AE. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1995. [Google Scholar]
  85. Gollan TH, Kroll JF. The handbook of cognitive neuropsychology: What deficits reveal about the human mind/brain. Hove, England: Psychology Press; 2001. Bilingual lexical access; pp. 321–345. [Google Scholar]
  86. Gries STh. Syntactic priming: A corpus-based approach. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 2005;34:365–399. doi: 10.1007/s10936-005-6139-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  87. Griffin ZM, Weinstein-Tull J. Conceptual structure modulates structural priming in the production of complex sentences. Journal of Memory and Language. 2003;49:537–555. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2003.08.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  88. Grober EH, Beardsley W, Caramazza A. Parallel function strategy in pronoun assignment. Cognition. 1978;6:117–133. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(78)90018-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  89. Hare ML, Goldberg AE. Structural priming: Purely syntactic? In: Hahn M, Stones SC, editors. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 1999. pp. 208–11. [Google Scholar]
  90. Hartsuiker RJ, Bernolet S, Schoonbaert S, Speybroeck S, Vanderelst D. Syntactic priming persists while the lexical boost decays: Evidence from written and spoken dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language in press. [Google Scholar]
  91. Hartsuiker RJ, Kolk HHJ. Syntactic facilitation in agrammatic sentence production. Brain and Language. 1998a;62:221–254. doi: 10.1006/brln.1997.1905. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  92. Hartsuiker RJ, Kolk HHJ. Syntactic persistence in Dutch. Language and Speech. 1998b;41:143–184. doi: 10.1177/002383099804100202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  93. Hartsuiker RJ, Kolk HHJ, Huiskamp P. Priming word order in sentence production. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1999;52A:129–147. [Google Scholar]
  94. Hartsuiker RJ, Pickering MJ. Language integration in bilingual sentence production. Acta Psychologica. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2007.08.005. in press. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  95. Hartsuiker RJ, Pickering MJ, Veltkamp E. Is syntax separate or shared between languages? Cross-linguistic syntactic priming in Spanish-English bilinguals. Psychological Science. 2004;15:409–414. doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00693.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  96. Hartsuiker RJ, Westenberg C. Word order priming in written and spoken sentence production. Cognition. 2000;75:B27–B39. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0277(99)00080-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  97. Haywood S, Pickering MJ, Branigan HP. Do speakers avoid ambiguities during dialogue? Psychological Science. 2005;16:362–366. doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01541.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  98. Heydel M, Murray WS. Conceptual effects in sentence priming: A crosslinguistic perspective. In: De Vincenzi M, Lombardo V, editors. Cross-linguistic perspectives on language processing. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer; 2000. pp. 227–254. [Google Scholar]
  99. Hirsh-Pasek K, Golinkoff RM. The origins of grammar: Evidence from early language comprehension. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1996. [Google Scholar]
  100. Huttenlocher J, Vasilyeva M, Shimpi P. Syntactic priming in young children. Journal of Memory and Language. 2004;50:182–195. [Google Scholar]
  101. Jackendoff RS. Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1972. [Google Scholar]
  102. Johnson JS, Newport EL. Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology. 1989;21:60–99. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(89)90003-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  103. Johnson-Laird PN. Mental Models: Toward a cognitive science of language, inference and consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1983. [Google Scholar]
  104. Kantola L, Van Gompel RPG. Between- and within-language priming is the same: Evidence for shared bilingual syntactic representations. 2008 doi: 10.3758/s13421-010-0016-5. Unpublished manuscript. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  105. Kaschak MP. What this construction needs is generalized. Memory & Cognition. 2006;34:368–379. doi: 10.3758/bf03193414. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  106. Kaschak MP. Long-term structural priming affects subsequent patterns of language production. Memory & Cognition. 2007;35:925–937. doi: 10.3758/bf03193466. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  107. Kaschak MP, Borregine KL. Is long-term structural priming affected by patterns of experience with individual verbs? Journal of Memory and Language. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2006.12.002. in press. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  108. Kaschak MP, Glenberg AM. This construction needs learned. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2004;133:450–467. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.3.450. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  109. Kaschak MP, Loney RA, Borregine KL. Recent experience affects the strength of structural priming. Cognition. 2006;99:B73–B82. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.07.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  110. Kempen G. Conceptualizing and formulating in sentence production. In: Rosenberg S, editor. Sentence production: Developments in research and theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1977. pp. 259–274. [Google Scholar]
  111. Kroch A. Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language Variation and Change. 1989;1:199–244. [Google Scholar]
  112. Lambrecht K. Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1994. [Google Scholar]
  113. Lashley KS. The problem of serial order in behavior. In: Jeffress LA, editor. Cerebral mechanisms in behavior. New York: Wiley; 1951. pp. 112–136. [Google Scholar]
  114. Ledoux K, Traxler MJ, Swaab TY. Syntactic priming in comprehension: Evidence from event-related potentials. Psychological Science. 2007;18:135–143. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01863.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  115. Leech R, Mareschal D, Cooper RP. Analogy as relational priming: A developmental and computational perspective on the origins of a complex cognitive skill. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X08004469. in press. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  116. Levelt WJM. Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1989. [Google Scholar]
  117. Levelt WJM, Kelter S. Surface form and memory in question answering. Cognitive Psychology. 1982;14:78–106. [Google Scholar]
  118. Levelt WJM, Roelofs A, Meyer AS. A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1999;22:1–75. doi: 10.1017/s0140525x99001776. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  119. Loebell H, Bock K. Structural priming across languages. Linguistics. 2003;41:791–824. [Google Scholar]
  120. Luka BJ, Barsalou LW. Structural facilitation: Mere exposure effects for grammatical acceptability as evidence for syntactic priming in comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language. 2005;52:436–459. [Google Scholar]
  121. McClelland JL, St John M, Taraban R. Sentence comprehension: A parallel distributed processing approach. Language and Cognitive Processes. 1989;4:287–335. [Google Scholar]
  122. MacDonald MC, Pearlmutter NJ, Seidenberg MS. The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review. 1994;101:676–703. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.101.4.676. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  123. McDonough K. Interaction and syntactic priming: English L2 speakers’ production of dative constructions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 2006;28:179–207. [Google Scholar]
  124. McNamara TP. Semantic priming: Perspectives from memory and word recognition. Hove, England: Psychology Press; 2005. [Google Scholar]
  125. Meeuwissen M, Roelofs A, Levelt WJM. Naming analog clocks conceptually facilitates naming digital clocks. Brain and Language. 2004;90:434–440. doi: 10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00454-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  126. Mehler J, Carey P. Role of surface and base structure in the perception of sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 1967;6:335–338. [Google Scholar]
  127. Mehler J, Carey P. The interaction of veracity and syntax in the processing of sentences. Perception & Psychophysics. 1968;3:109–111. [Google Scholar]
  128. Meijer PJA, Fox Tree JE. Building syntactic structures in speaking: A bilingual exploration. Experimental Psychology. 2003;50:184–195. doi: 10.1026//1617-3169.50.3.184. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  129. Melinger A, Dobel C. Lexically-driven syntactic priming. Cognition. 2005;98:B11–B20. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.02.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  130. Meyer DE, Schvaneveldt RW. Facilitation in recognising pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1971;90:227–234. doi: 10.1037/h0031564. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  131. Miller GA, Isard SD. Some perceptual consequences of linguistic rules. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 1963;2:217–228. [Google Scholar]
  132. Myers-Scotton C. Duelling languages: Grammatical structure in codeswitching. 2. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1997. [Google Scholar]
  133. Naigles LR. Children use syntax to learn verb meanings. Journal of Child Language. 1990;17:357–374. doi: 10.1017/s0305000900013817. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  134. Noppeney U, Price CJ. An fMRI study of syntactic adaptation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2004;16:702–713. doi: 10.1162/089892904323057399. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  135. Novick J, Kim AE, Trueswell J. Studying the grammatical aspects of word recognition: Lexical priming, parsing and syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 2003;32:57–75. doi: 10.1023/a:1021985032200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  136. Pardo JS. On phonetic convergence during conversational interaction. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2006;119:2382–2393. doi: 10.1121/1.2178720. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  137. Pickering M, Barry GD. Sentence processing without empty categories. Language and Cognitive Processes. 1991;6:229–259. [Google Scholar]
  138. Pickering MJ, Branigan HP. The representation of verbs: Evidence from syntactic priming in language production. Journal of Memory and Language. 1998;39:633–651. [Google Scholar]
  139. Pickering MJ, Branigan HP. Syntactic priming in language production. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 1999;3:136–141. doi: 10.1016/s1364-6613(99)01293-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  140. Pickering MJ, Branigan HP, McLean JF. Constituent structure is formulated in one stage. Journal of Memory and Language. 2002;46:586–605. [Google Scholar]
  141. Pickering MJ, Garrod S. Do people use language production to make predictions during comprehension? Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2007;11:105–110. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.12.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  142. Pickering MJ, McLean JF, Branigan HP, Cheung YT, Peacock AK. Do bilinguals inhibit the syntax of the non-target language? 2007 Unpublished manuscript. [Google Scholar]
  143. Pickering MJ, Traxler MJ. Grammatical repetition and garden-path effects: Syntactic priming in on-line sentence comprehension. 2008 Unpublished manuscript. [Google Scholar]
  144. Pickering MJ, Van Gompel RPG. Sentence processing. In: Gernsbacher MA, Traxler MJ, editors. Handbook of psycholinguistics. San Diego: Academic Press; 2006. pp. 455–503. [Google Scholar]
  145. Pollard C, Sag IA. Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1994. [Google Scholar]
  146. Potter MC, Lombardi L. Syntactic priming in immediate recall of sentences. Journal of Memory and Language. 1998;38:265–282. [Google Scholar]
  147. Raffray CN, Pickering MJ, Branigan HP. Priming the interpretation of noun-noun combinations. Journal of Memory and Language. 2007;57:380–395. [Google Scholar]
  148. Rawson KA. Exploring automaticity in text processing: Syntactic ambiguity as a test case. Cognitive Psychology. 2004;49:3330369. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2004.04.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  149. Roelofs A. A spreading-activation theory of lemma retrieval in speaking. Cognition. 1992;42:107–142. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(92)90041-f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  150. Roelofs A. Testing a non-decompositional theory of lemma retrieval in speaking: Retrieval of verbs. Cognition. 1993;47:59–87. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(93)90062-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  151. Roelofs A, Meyer AS. Metrical structure in planning the production of spoken words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 1998;24:922–938. [Google Scholar]
  152. Saffran EM, Martin N. Effects of structural priming on sentence production in aphasics. Language and Cognitive Processes. 1997;12:877–882. [Google Scholar]
  153. Salamoura A, Williams JN. Lexical activation of cross-language syntactic priming. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition. 2006;9:299–307. [Google Scholar]
  154. Salamoura A, Williams JN. Processing verb argument structure across languages: Evidence for shared representations in the bilingual lexicon. Applied Psycholinguistics. 2007;28:627–660. [Google Scholar]
  155. Savage C, Lieven E, Theakston A, Tomasello M. Testing the abstractness of children’s linguistic representations: Lexical and structural priming of syntactic constructions in young children. Developmental Science. 2003;6:557–567. doi: 10.1111/1467-7687.00312. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  156. Savage C, Lieven E, Theakston A, Tomasello M. Structural priming as implicit learning in language acquisition: The persistence of lexical and structural priming in 4-year-olds. Language Learning and Development. 2006;2:27–50. [Google Scholar]
  157. Scheepers C. Syntactic priming of relative clause attachments: Persistence of structural configuration in sentence production. Cognition. 2003;89:179–205. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0277(03)00119-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  158. Scheepers C, Crocker MW. Constituent order priming from listening to comprehension: A visual-world study. In: Carreiras M, Clifton C Jr, editors. The online study of sentence comprehension: Eyetracking, ERPs, and beyond. New York: Psychology Press; 2004. pp. 167–185. [Google Scholar]
  159. Scherre MMP, Naro A. Marking in discourse: ‘Birds of a feather’. Language Variation and Change. 1991;3:23–32. [Google Scholar]
  160. Schober MF. Spatial perspective-taking in conversation. Cognition. 1993;47:1–24. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(93)90060-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  161. Schenkein J. A taxonomy for repeating action sequences in natural conversation. In: Butterworth B, editor. Language production. Vol. 1. London: Academic Press; 1980. pp. 21–47. [Google Scholar]
  162. Schoonbaert S, Hartsuiker RJ, Pickering MJ. The representation of lexical and syntactic information in bilinguals: Evidence from syntactic priming. Journal of Memory and Language. 2007;56:153–171. [Google Scholar]
  163. Schütze C. The empirical base of linguistics: Grammaticality judgments and linguistic methodology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1996. [Google Scholar]
  164. Selten R, Warglien M. The emergence of simple languages in an experimental communication game. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2007;104:7361–7366. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0702077104. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  165. Sevald CA, Dell GS. The sequential cuing effect in speech production. Cognition. 1994;53:91–127. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90067-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  166. Sevald CA, Dell GS, Cole JS. Syllable structure in speech production: Are syllables chunks or schemas? Journal of Memory and Language. 1995;34:807–820. [Google Scholar]
  167. Sheldon A. The role of parallel function in the acquisition of relative clauses in English. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 1974;13:272–281. [Google Scholar]
  168. Shimpi PM, Gámez PB, Huttenlocher J, Vasilyeva M. Syntactic priming in 3- and 4-year-old children: Evidence for abstract representations of transitive and dative forms. Developmental Psychology. 2007;43:1334–1346. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1334. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  169. Smith M, Wheeldon L. Syntactic priming in spoken sentence production: An online study. Cognition. 2001;78:123–164. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0277(00)00110-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  170. Smyth R. Grammatical determinants of ambiguous pronoun resolution. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 1994;23:197–229. [Google Scholar]
  171. Snyder W. An experimental investigation of syntactic satiation effects. Linguistic Inquiry. 2000;31:575–582. [Google Scholar]
  172. Steedman MJ. The syntactic process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2000. [Google Scholar]
  173. Stevenson RJ, Nelson AWR, Stenning K. The role of parallelism in strategies of pronoun comprehension. Language and Speech. 1995;38:393–418. [Google Scholar]
  174. Szmrecsanyi B. Language users as creatures of habit: A corpus-based analysis of persistence in spoken English. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. 2005;1:113–149. [Google Scholar]
  175. Szmrecsanyi B. Morphosyntactic persistence in spoken English: A corpus study at the intersection of variationist sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and discourse analysis. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter; 2006. [Google Scholar]
  176. Tanenhaus MK, Spivey-Knowlton MJ, Eberhard KM, Sedivy JC. Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science. 1995;268:1632–1634. doi: 10.1126/science.7777863. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  177. Tannen D. Repetition in conversation: Toward a poetics of talk. Language. 1987;63:574–605. [Google Scholar]
  178. Tannen D. Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1989. [Google Scholar]
  179. Thothathiri M, Snedeker J. Give and Take: Syntactic priming during spoken language comprehension. Cognition. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.12.012. in press-a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  180. Thothathiri M, Snedeker J. Syntactic priming during language comprehension in three- and four-year-old children. Journal of Memory and Language in press-b. [Google Scholar]
  181. Tomasello M. Do young children have adult syntactic competence? Cognition. 2000;74:209–253. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0277(99)00069-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  182. Travis C. Genre effects on subject expression in Spanish: Priming in narrative and conversation. Language Variation and Change. 2007;19:101–135. [Google Scholar]
  183. Traxler MJ. Lexically independent priming in online sentence comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2008;15:149–155. doi: 10.3758/pbr.15.1.149. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  184. Traxler MJ. Structural priming among prepositional phrases: Evidence from eye-movements. Memory & Cognition. doi: 10.3758/mc.36.3.659. in press. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  185. Traxler MJ, Tooley KM. Lexical mediation and context effects in sentence processing. Brain Research. 2007;1146:59–74. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.10.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  186. Traxler MJ, Tooley KM. Priming in on-line sentence comprehension: Strategic or syntactic? Language and Cognitive Processes. doi: 10.1080/01690965.2013.770892. in press. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  187. Traxler MJ, McElree B, Williams RS, Pickering MJ. Context effects in coercion: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language. 2005;53:1–25. [Google Scholar]
  188. Trueswell JC, Kim AE. How to prune a garden path by nipping it in the bud: Fast priming of verb argument structure. Journal of Memory and Language. 1998;39:102–123. [Google Scholar]
  189. Trueswell JC, Tanenhaus MK, Garnsey SM. Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language. 1994;33:285–318. [Google Scholar]
  190. Trueswell JC, Tanenhaus MK, Kello C. Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 1993;19:528–553. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.19.3.528. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  191. Ullman T. The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: the declarative/procedural model. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition. 2001;4:105–122. [Google Scholar]
  192. van Dijk TA, Kintsch W. Strategies in discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press; 1983. [Google Scholar]
  193. van Gompel RPG, Pickering MJ, Pearson J, Jacob G. The activation of inappropriate analyses in garden-path sentences: Evidence from structural priming. Journal of Memory and Language. 2006;55:335–362. [Google Scholar]
  194. Vasilyeva M, Huttenlocher J, Waterfall H. Effects of language intervention on syntactic skill levels in preschoolers. Developmental Psychology. 2006;42:164–174. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.42.1.164. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  195. Watson M, Pickering MJ, Branigan HP. Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2004. Alignment of reference frames in dialogue. [Google Scholar]
  196. Weiner EJ, Labov W. Constraints on the agentless passive. Journal of Linguistics. 1983;19:29–58. [Google Scholar]
  197. Wheeldon LR, Smith MC. Phrase structure priming: A short lived effect. Language and Cognitive Processes. 2003;18:431–442. [Google Scholar]
  198. Whitehurst GJ, Ironsmith M, Goldfein M. Selective imitation of the passive construction through modeling. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 1974;17:288–302. [Google Scholar]
  199. Wicha NYY, Orozco-Figueroa A, Reyes I, Hernandez A, de Barreto LG, Bates EA. When zebras become painted donkeys: Grammatical gender and semantic priming interact during picture integration in a spoken Spanish sentence. Language and Cognitive Processes. 2005;20:553–587. doi: 10.1080/01690960444000241. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  200. Wisniewski EJ, Love BC. Relations versus properties in conceptual combination. Journal of Memory and Language. 1998;38:177–202. [Google Scholar]

200 of 201 shown

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 1,047

Metadata

Authors
Pickering, M. J., & Ferreira, V. S.
Affiliations
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
ORCID
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2008
Volume
134
Issue
3
Pages
427-459
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
DOI
10.1037/0033-2909.134.3.427
PMC
PMC2657366
OpenAlex
W2020046942
Cited by
1,047
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 78 · 2022: 97 · 2021: 91 · 2020: 145 · 2019: 73 · 2018: 55 · 2017: 71 · 2016: 57 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 49 · 2013: 43 · 2012: 37
FWCI
14.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Economic and Social Research Council (RES-062-23-0376)
  • National Institutes of Health (R01-HD051030)
  • British Academy
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
Keywords
structural priming, sentence production, sentence comprehension, syntactic representation, syntactic priming, first language acquisition, bilingualism, aphasia
MeSH terms
Cognition, Humans, Language Development, Speech Perception, Verbal Learning

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