The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity resolution
Abstract
Natural languages contain probabilistic constraints that influence the resolution of ambiguities. Current models of sentence processing agree that probabilistic constraints affect syntactic ambiguity resolution, but there has been little investigation of the constraints themselves-what they are, how they differ in their effects on processing, and how they interact with one another. Three different types of probabilistic constraints were investigated: “pre-ambiguity” plausibility information, information about verb argument structure frequencies, and “post-ambiguity” constraints that arrive after the introduction of the ambiguity but prior to its disambiguation. Reading times for syntactically ambiguous sentences were compared to reading times for unambiguous controls in three self-paced reading experiments. All three kinds of constraints were found to be helpful, and when several constraints converged, ambiguity resolution was facilitated compared to when constraints conflicted. The importance of these constraint interactions for ambiguity resolution models is discussed.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Thus, the ambiguityis stronglyconstrained bythe frequencywith which the ambiguous verb occurs in transitive and passive structures, of which reduced relative clauses are a special type (MacDonald, 1994; MacDonald, Pearlmutter, & Seidenberg, 1994; Trueswell, 1996).”
From FREQUENCY EFFECTS IN LANGUAGE PROCESSING: A Review with Implications for Theories of Implicit and Explicit Language Acquisition (2002) · cites this paper as MacDonald, 1994
Citations
Cites
Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix
Steiger, J. H. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.87.2.245 · Cited by 4,621
Constraints on variables in syntax
Ross, J. R. (1967) · DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) · Cited by 4,102
Baltin, M. R. (1985) · Language · doi:10.2307/414493 · Cited by 2,785
The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution
MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.101.4.676 · Cited by 2,259
Self-citationInteraction of information in word recognition.
Morton, J. (1969) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0027366 · Cited by 2,206
Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition
Marslen‐Wilson, W. D. (1987) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(87)90005-9 · Cited by 1,817
Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1982) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.89.1.60 · Cited by 1,530
Processing interactions and lexical access during word recognition in continuous speech
Marslen‐Wilson, W. D., & Welsh, A. (1978) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(78)90018-x · Cited by 1,464
The cognitive basis for linguistic structures1
Bever, T. G. (2013) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199677139.003.0001 · Cited by 1,301
Attention and Performance XII: The Psychology of Reading
Coltheart, M. (1987) · Cited by 1,195
Research works printed but not linked: 17
- Altmann G. T. M., Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition.
- Berg G., 1991, Learning recursive phrase structure: Combining the strengths of PDP and x-bar syntax.
- Bever T. G., 1970, Cognitive development of language.
- Bresnan J., 1992, The mental representation of grammatical relations.
- Burgess, C. and Hollbach, S. C. A computational model of syntactic ambiguity as a lexical process. Proceedings of the 10th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. pp.263–269. pp.
- Carlson G. N., 1988, Syntax and semantics, Vol. 21: Thematic relations.
- Ford M., 1982, The mental representation of grammatical relations.
- Hawkins J. A., 1990, Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 223
- 10.1037/0096-3445.111.2.228 · DOI
- Kawamoto A., 1988, Lexical ambiguity resolution: Computational, linguistic, and psychological perspectives.
- Levin B., 1986, Linguistic Inquiry, 17, 623
- Maslin J., 1991, New York Times, C8
- 10.1037/0278-7393.18.1.69 · DOI
- Pearlmutter, N. J. and MacDonald, M. C. Plausibility and syntactic ambiguity resolution. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Society. pp.498–503. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. In, pp.
- Trueswell, J. C. and Tanenhaus, M. K. Consulting temporal context during sentence comprehension: Evidence from the monitoring of eye movements in reading. 14th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. pp.492–497. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. In, pp.
- Trueswell J. C., Journal of Memory and Language.
- Tyler L. K., 1989, Lexical representation and process.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Understanding normal and impaired word reading: Computational principles in quasi-regular domains.
Plaut, D. C., McClelland, J. L., Seidenberg, M. S., & Patterson, K. (1996) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.103.1.56 · Cited by 2,698
Ellis, N. C. (2002) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263102002024 · Cited by 2,230
The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution
MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.101.4.676 · Cited by 2,259
Self-citationThe misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences
Ferreira, F. (2003) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0010-0285(03)00005-7 · Cited by 907
Saccadic eye movements and cognition
Liversedge, S., & Findlay, J. M. (2000) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(99)01418-7 · Cited by 862
Metadata
- Authors
- MacDonald, M. C.
- Affiliations
- University of Southern California (US)
- Corresponding author
- MacDonald, Maryellen C.
- Venue
- Language and Cognitive Processes
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1994-05
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 157-201
- ISSN
- 0169-0965 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-0732
- OpenAlex
- W2154590657
- Cited by
- 379
- References
- 46
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 5.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Language and Cognitive Processes (publishedVersion)
- 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 › Reading and Literacy Development
- Keywords
- syntactic ambiguity resolution, chance constraints, constraint interaction, reading time, self-paced reading, sentence processing, ambiguity disambiguation
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