The Old and Thee, uh, New: Disfluency and Reference Resolution
Abstract
Most research on the rapid mental processes of online language processing has been limited to the study of idealized, fluent utterances. Yet speakers are often disfluent, for example, saying “thee, uh, candle” instead of “the candle.” By monitoring listeners' eye movements to objects in a display, we demonstrated that the fluency of an article (“thee uh” vs. “the”) affects how listeners interpret the following noun. With a fluent article, listeners were biased toward an object that had been mentioned previously, but with a disfluent article, they were biased toward an object that had not been mentioned. These biases were apparent as early as lexical information became available, showing that disfluency affects the basic processes of decoding linguistic input.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Conversational speech is riddled with disfluencies, i.e. silent and filled pauses, repetitions, errors and repairs.
“In fact, conversational speech is riddled with disfluencies, i.e. silent and filled pause, repetitions, errors and repairs”
From Timing in Conversation (2023) · cites this paper as Arnold et al., 2004
Cites
Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking
Clark, H. (2002) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(02)00017-3 · Cited by 1,235 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Attenuating information in spoken communication: for the speaker, or for the addressee?
Galati, A., & Brennan, S. E. (2010) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.09.002 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
Irvine, C. A., Eigsti, I.-M., & Fein, D. A. (2016) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s10803-015-2651-y · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Meyer, A. S. (2023) · Journal of Cognition · doi:10.5334/joc.268 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
- Authors
- Arnold, J. E., Tanenhaus, M. K., Altmann, R. J., & Fagnano, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Rochester (US)
- Venue
- Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2004-09
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 578-582
- ISSN
- 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9280
- OpenAlex
- W2097914860
- Cited by
- 176
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 1.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD 27206, R01HD041522, HD-41522, R01HD027206)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
- Keywords
- disfluency, eye movements, object recognition, lexical access, sentence comprehension, rapid serial visual presentation
- MeSH terms
- Eye Movements, Humans, Time Factors, Verbal Behavior
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