Cited by 24Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismLanguage Development and DisordersSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Self‐Priming in Production: Evidence for a Hybrid Model of Syntactic Priming

Open access
Jacobs, Cassandra L., Cho, Sun‐Joo, Watson, Duane G.·2019·Cognitive Science

Abstract

Syntactic priming in language production is the increased likelihood of using a recently encountered syntactic structure. In this paper, we examine two theories of why speakers can be primed: error‐driven learning accounts (Bock, Dell, Chang, & Onishi, 2007; Chang, Dell, & Bock, 2006) and activation‐based accounts (Pickering & Branigan, 1999; Reitter, Keller, & Moore, 2011). Both theories predict that speakers should be primed by the syntactic choices of others, but only activation‐based accounts predict that speakers should be able to prime themselves. Here we test whether speakers can be primed by their own productions in three behavioral experiments and find evidence of structural persistence following both comprehension and speakers’ own productions. We also find that comprehension‐based priming effects are larger for rarer syntactic structures than for more common ones, which is most consistent with error‐driven accounts. Because neither error‐driven accounts nor activation‐based accounts fully explain the data, we propose a hybrid model.

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 · 10.1111/cogs.12749

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 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

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: 43

  1. 10.1177/0261927X13499331 · DOI
  2. Bates D., 2014, lme4: Linear mixed‐effects models using Eigen and S4, R Package Version, 1, 1
  3. 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.11.005 · DOI
  4. 10.1016/0010-0285(86)90004-6 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.07.003 · DOI
  6. 10.1037/0096-3445.129.2.177 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1016/0010-0277(90)90035-I · DOI
  8. Box G. E. P., 1976, Time series analysis: Forecasting and control
  9. 10.3758/BF03212972 · DOI
  10. 10.1037/0033-295X.113.2.234 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1007/s11336-018-9604-2 · DOI
  12. 10.1098/rstb.2012.0394 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00523-5 · DOI
  14. 10.1111/cogs.12022 · DOI
  15. 10.1007/s10936-005-6139-3 · DOI
  16. Hara K., 2018, A data‐driven analysis of workers’ earnings on Amazon Mechanical Turk. In Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ’18
  17. 10.1016/j.jml.2007.07.003 · DOI
  18. 10.1177/002383099804100202 · DOI
  19. 10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00080-3 · DOI
  20. 10.1371/journal.pone.0098598 · DOI
  21. 10.1002/sim.1522 · DOI
  22. 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.02.006 · DOI
  23. 10.1177/0956797610392928 · DOI
  24. 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.10.013 · DOI
  25. 10.3758/BF03193466 · DOI
  26. 10.1080/01690965.2011.641387 · DOI
  27. 10.3758/s13421-010-0042-3 · DOI
  28. Kleinschmidt D. F., 2012, Proceedings of the 34th annual conference of the cognitive science society, 599
  29. 10.1037/0278-7393.33.3.503 · DOI
  30. 10.1016/j.jml.2016.03.009 · DOI
  31. 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.10.021 · DOI
  32. 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.09.007 · DOI
  33. 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2005.00389.x · DOI
  34. 10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01293-0 · DOI
  35. 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01165.x · DOI
  36. 10.1016/j.jml.2014.05.008 · DOI
  37. 10.1016/j.jml.2018.05.004 · DOI
  38. 10.1016/j.bandl.2012.12.003 · DOI
  39. 10.1007/BF02294801 · DOI
  40. Spiegelhalter D., 2003, WinBUGS version 1.4.3 [Computer program]
  41. Szmrecsanyi B., 2008, Morphosyntactic persistence in spoken English. A corpus study at the intersection of variationist sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and discourse analysis
  42. 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.04.002 · DOI
  43. 10.1016/j.jml.2017.09.004 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 24

Metadata

Authors
Jacobs, C. L., Cho, S., & Watson, D. G.
Affiliations
  • University of California System (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
  • Department of Psychology and Human Development Vanderbilt University
Corresponding author
Jacobs, Cassandra L.
Venue
Cognitive Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-07
Volume
43
Issue
7
Pages
e12749-e12749
ISSN
  • 0364-0213 (ISSN-L)
  • 1551-6709
OpenAlex
W2955032262
Cited by
24
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Keywords
syntactic priming, self-priming, language production, error-based learning, structural persistence, syntactic structure, hybrid model
MeSH terms
Humans, Linguistics, Models, Psychological, Speech, Verbal Behavior, Comprehension, Repetition Priming

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