The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Incrementality and Prediction in Human Sentence Processing
Open accessAbstract
We identify a number of principles with respect to prediction that, we argue, underpin adult language comprehension: (a) comprehension consists in realizing a mapping between the unfolding sentence and the event representation corresponding to the real‐world event being described; (b) the realization of this mapping manifests as the ability to predict both how the language will unfold, and how the real‐world event would unfold if it were being experienced directly; (c) concurrent linguistic and nonlinguistic inputs, and the prior internal states of the system, each drive the predictive process; (d) the representation of prior internal states across a representational substrate common to the linguistic and nonlinguistic domains enables the predictive process to operate over variable time frames and variable levels of representational abstraction. We review empirical data exemplifying the operation of these principles and discuss the relationship between prediction, event structure, thematic role assignment, and incrementality.
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
Hochreiter, S., & Schmidhuber, J. (1997) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735 · Cited by 102,318
Situation models in language comprehension and memory
Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.123.2.162 · Cited by 2,877
Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03196313 · Cited by 2,361
Learning and development in neural networks: the importance of starting small
Elman, J. L. (1993) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(93)90058-4 · Cited by 1,988
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
Eye scanpaths during visual imagery reenact those of perception of the same visual scene
Laeng, B., & Teodorescu, D. (2002) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2602_3 · Cited by 480
A computational model of event segmentation from perceptual prediction
Reynolds, J. R., Zacks, J. M., & Braver, T. S. (2007) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1080/15326900701399913 · Cited by 172
Cited by
An integrated theory of language production and comprehension
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2013) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x12001495 · Cited by 1,569
What do we mean by prediction in language comprehension?
Kuperberg, G. R., & Jaeger, T. F. (2016) · Language, Cognition and Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/23273798.2015.1102299 · Cited by 1,087
Predicting while comprehending language: A theory and review.
Pickering, M. J., & Gambi, C. (2018) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000158 · Cited by 518
Four central questions about prediction in language processing
Huettig, F. (2015) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2015.02.014 · Cited by 405
Structured Event Memory: A neuro-symbolic model of event cognition.
Franklin, N. T., Norman, K. A., Ranganath, C., Zacks, J. M., & Gershman, S. J. (2020) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/rev0000177 · Cited by 177
Metadata
- Authors
- Altmann, G. T. M., & Mirković, J.
- Venue
- Cognitive Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-04-24
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 583-609
- ISSN
- 0364-0213 (ISSN-L)
- 1551-6709
- OpenAlex
- W2123269155
- Cited by
- 369
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 6.70
- 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: Incrementality and Prediction in Human Sentence Processing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01022.x
- The paper
- Altmann, G. T. M., & Mirković, J. (2009). Incrementality and Prediction in Human Sentence Processing. Cognitive Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01022.x
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.
