The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Activation‐Based Model of Sentence Processing as Skilled Memory Retrieval
Open accessAbstract
We present a detailed process theory of the moment‐by‐moment working‐memory retrievals and associated control structure that subserve sentence comprehension. The theory is derived from the application of independently motivated principles of memory and cognitive skill to the specialized task of sentence parsing. The resulting theory construes sentence processing as a series of skilled associative memory retrievals modulated by similarity‐based interference and fluctuating activation. The cognitive principles are formalized in computational form in the Adaptive Control of Thought–Rational (ACT–R) architecture, and our process model is realized in ACT–R. We present the results of 6 sets of simulations: 5 simulation sets provide quantitative accounts of the effects of length and structural interference on both unambiguous and garden‐path structures. A final simulation set provides a graded taxonomy of double center embeddings ranging from relatively easy to extremely difficult. The explanation of center‐embedding difficulty is a novel one that derives from the model' complete reliance on discriminating retrieval cues in the absence of an explicit representation of serial order information. All fits were obtained with only 1 free scaling parameter fixed across the simulations; all other parameters were ACT–R defaults. The modeling results support the hypothesis that fluctuating activation and similarity‐based interference are the key factors shaping working memory in sentence processing. We contrast the theory and empirical predictions with several related accounts of sentence‐processing complexity.
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
The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.
Miller, G. A. (1956) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0043158 · Cited by 17,812
ASPECTS OF THE THEORY OF SYNTAX
Chomsky, N. (1964) · doi:10.21236/ad0616323 · Cited by 13,587
Fodor, J. A. (1983) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4737.001.0001 · Cited by 7,734
The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity
Cowan, N. (2001) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x01003922 · Cited by 6,779
A capacity theory of comprehension: individual differences in working memory
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.99.1.122 · Cited by 4,153
Syntactic persistence in language production
Bock, J. K. (1986) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(86)90004-6 · Cited by 1,911
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
The persistence of structural priming: Transient activation or implicit learning?
Bock, K., & Griffin, Z. M. (2000) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.129.2.177 · Cited by 950
Human Symbol Manipulation Within an Integrated Cognitive Architecture
Anderson, J. R. (2005) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0000_22 · Cited by 253
Cited by
The Mind and Brain of Short-Term Memory
Jonides, J., Lewis, R. L., Nee, D. E., Lustig, C. A., Berman, M. G., & Moore, K. S. (2008) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093615 · Cited by 957
Self-citationCross-Linguistic Variation and Efficiency
Hawkins, J. A. (2014) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199664993.001.0001 · Cited by 405
The Cortical Organization of Syntax
Matchin, W., & Hickok, G. (2020) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhz180 · Cited by 370
Salvucci, D. D., Taatgen, N. A., & Borst, J. P. (2009) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/1518701.1518981 · Cited by 251
fMRI reveals language-specific predictive coding during naturalistic sentence comprehension
Shain, C., Blank, I. A., van Schijndel, M., Schuler, W., & Fedorenko, E. (2020) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2019.107307 · Cited by 215
The problem state: A cognitive bottleneck in multitasking.
Borst, J. P., Taatgen, N. A., & van Rijn, H. (2010) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/a0018106 · Cited by 193
Theoretical Limitations of Self-Attention in Neural Sequence Models
Hahn, M. (2020) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00306 · Cited by 165
Interference patterns in subject-verb agreement and reflexives revisited: A large-sample study
Jäger, L. A., Mertzen, D., Van Dyke, J. A., & Vasishth, S. (2020) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2019.104063 · Cited by 142
Self-citationUnification of sentence processing via ear and eye: An fMRI study
Braze, D., Mencl, W. E., Tabor, W., Pugh, K. R., Todd Constable, R., Fulbright, R. K., Magnuson, J. S., Van Dyke, J. A., & Shankweiler, D. P. (2011) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2009.11.005 · Cited by 69
Wehbe, L., Blank, I. A., Shain, C., Futrell, R., Levy, R., von der Malsburg, T., Smith, N., Gibson, E., & Fedorenko, E. (2021) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhab065 · Cited by 72
Borst, J. P., Taatgen, N. A., Stocco, A., & van Rijn, H. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0012966 · Cited by 52
Developmental language disorder as syntactic prediction impairment
Hestvik, A., Epstein, B., Schwartz, R. G., & Shafer, V. L. (2022) · Frontiers in Communication · doi:10.3389/fcomm.2021.637585 · Cited by 11
“…a mechanism, called the parser, automatically generates a search for the origin of the displaced constituent, and generates predictions about where it will be found in the unfolding sentence structure (Crain and Fodor, 1985; but see Lewis and Vasishth, 2005; McElree, 2000 for alternative models).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Lewis, R. L., & Vasishth, S.
- Venue
- Cognitive Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-05
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 375-419
- ISSN
- 0364-0213 (ISSN-L)
- 1551-6709
- OpenAlex
- W2107265154
- Cited by
- 1,035
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 5.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
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.
