The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Impairments in verb morphology after brain injury: A connectionist model
Open accessAbstract
The formation of the past tense of verbs in English has been the focus of the debate concerning connectionist vs. symbolic accounts of language. Brain-injured patients differ with respect to whether they are more impaired in generating irregular past tenses (take–took) or past tenses for nonce verbs (wug–wugged). Such dissociations have been taken as evidence for distinct “rule” and “associative” memory systems in morphology and against the connectionist approach in which a single system is used for all forms. We describe a simulation model in which these impairments arise from damage to phonological or semantic information, which have different effects on generalization and irregular forms, respectively. The results provide an account of the bases of impairments in verb morphology and show that these impairments can be explained within connectionist models that do not use rules or a separate mechanism for exceptions.
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
ASPECTS OF THE THEORY OF SYNTAX
Chomsky, N. (1964) · doi:10.21236/ad0616323 · Cited by 13,587
From Neuropsychology to Mental Structure
Shallice, T. (1988) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511526817 · Cited by 4,072
The Structural Sources of Verb Meanings
Gleitman, L. (1990) · Language Acquisition · doi:10.1207/s15327817la0101_2 · Cited by 1,783
Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development
Elman, J., Bates, E., Johnson, M. H., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D., & Plunkett, K. (1996) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/5929.001.0001 · Cited by 1,511
Lesioning an attractor network: Investigations of acquired dyslexia.
Hinton, G. E., & Shallice, T. (1991) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037//0033-295x.98.1.74 · Cited by 655
Language Acquisition and Use: Learning and Applying Probabilistic Constraints
Seidenberg, M. S. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.275.5306.1599 · Cited by 338
Self-citation
Cited by
Contributions of memory circuits to language: the declarative/procedural model
Ullman, M. T. (2004) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.008 · Cited by 1,893
A neurocognitive perspective on language: The declarative/procedural model
Ullman, M. T. (2001) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/35094573 · Cited by 997
Rogers, T. T., Lambon Ralph, M. A., Garrard, P., Bozeat, S., McClelland, J. L., Hodges, J. R., & Patterson, K. (2004) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.111.1.205 · Cited by 948
Ullman, M. T. (2001) · Bilingualism: Language and Cognition · doi:10.1017/s1366728901000220 · Cited by 803
Jones, M., & Love, B. C. (2011) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x10003134 · Cited by 533
Metadata
- Authors
- Joanisse, M. F., & Seidenberg, M. S.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 1999-06-22
- Volume
- 96
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 7592-7597
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2141047823
- Cited by
- 408
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 6.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Impairments in verb morphology after brain injury: A connectionist model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.96.13.7592
- The paper
- Joanisse, M. F., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1999). Impairments in verb morphology after brain injury: A connectionist model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.96.13.7592
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.
