Pupillary dynamics reveal computational cost in sentence planning

REFERENCES

• Allum, P. H., & Wheeldon, L. R. (2007). Planning scope in spoken sentence production: The role of grammatical units. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 33(4), 791–810.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beatty, J. (1982). Task-evoked pupillary responses, processing load, and the structure of processing resources. Psychological Bulletin, 91(2), 276–292. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.91.2.276
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beatty, J., & Lucero-Wagoner, B. (2000). Pupillary system. Chapter 6. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary & G. Berntson (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (pp. 142–161). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bock, K. (1990). Structure in language. Creating form in talk. American Psychologist, 45(11), 1221–1236. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.45.11.1221
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bock, K., & Levelt, W. L. (1994). Language production: Grammatical encoding. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 945–984). London: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bock, K., & Loebell, H. (1990). Framing sentences. Cognition, 35(1), 1–39. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(90)90035-I
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436. doi: 10.1163/156856897X00357
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Corrêa, L. M. S. (2011). Minimalist perspectives for psycholinguistic research. Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 29, 214–230.
   Google Scholar
• Corrêa, L. M. S., Augusto, M., & Marcilese, M. (2009). Resumptive pronuns and passives in the production of object relative clauses: Circumbenting computational cost. Paper presented at the CUNY: Conference on Human Sentence Processing, University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Dehaene, S., Naccache, L., Cohen, L., Bihan, D. L., Mangin, J. F., & Poline, J. B. (2001). Cerebral mechanisms of word masking and unconscious repetition priming. Nature Neurosciences, 4(7), 752–758. doi: 10.1038/89551
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engelhardt, P. E., Ferreira, F., & Patsenko, E. G. (2010). Pupillometry reveals processing load during spoken language comprehension. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(4), 639–645. doi: 10.1080/17470210903469864
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F. (1994). Choice of passive voice is affected by verb type and animacy. Journal of Memory and Language, 33(6), 715–736. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1994.1034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., & Swets, B. (2002). How incremental is language production? Evidence from the production of utterances requiring the computation of arithmetic sums. Journal of Memory and Language, 46(1), 57–84. doi: 10.1006/jmla.2001.2797
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, V. S., & Slevc, L. R. (2007). Grammatical encoding. In M. G. Gaskell (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 453–469). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frazier, L. (1995). Constraint satisfaction as a theory of sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24(6), 437–468. doi: 10.1007/BF02143161
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gennari, S. P., Mirkovic, J., & Macdonald, M. C. (2012). Animacy and competition in relative clause production: A cross-linguistic investigation. Cognitive Psychology, 65(2), 141–176. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.03.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffin, Z. M., & Spieler, D. H. (2006). Observing the what and when of language production for different age groups by monitoring speakers’ eye movements. Brain and Language, 99(3), 272–288. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2005.08.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1993). The intensity dimension of thought: Pupillometric indices of sentence processing. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47(2), 310–339. doi: 10.1037/h0078820
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamienkowski, J. E., Ison, M. J., Quiroga, R. Q., & Sigman, M. (2012). Fixation-related potentials in visual search: A combined EEG and eye tracking study. Journal of Vision, 12(7), 4. Retrieved from http://www.journalofvision.org/content/12/7/4.full doi: 10.1167/12.7.4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konopka, A. E. (2012). Planning ahead: How recent experience with structures and words changes the scope of linguistic planning. Journal of Memory and Language, 66(1), 143–162. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2011.08.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konopka, A. E., & Bock, K. (2009). Lexical or syntactic control of sentence formulation? Structural generalizations from idiom production. Cognitive Psychology, 58(1), 68–101. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2008.05.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuchinke, L., Vo, M. L., Hofmann, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (2007). Pupillary responses during lexical decisions vary with word frequency but not emotional valence. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 65(2), 132–140. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2007.04.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. J., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral Brain Science, 22(1), 1–380; discussion 38–75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luck, S. J. (2005). An introduction to the event-related potential technique. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Macdonald, M. C. (2013). How language production shapes language form and comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 226. Retrieved from http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00226/full
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myachykov, A., Scheepers, C., Garrod, S., Thompson, D., & Fedorova, O. (2013). Syntactic flexibility and competition in sentence production: The case of English and Russian. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(8), 1601–1619. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2012.754910
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papesh, M. H., & Goldinger, S. D. (2012). Pupil-BLAH-metry: Cognitive effort in speech planning reflected by pupil dilation. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74(4), 754–765. doi:10.3758/s13414-011-0263-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips, C. (1996). Order and structure. (Ph D), Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/10666
   Google Scholar
• Phillips, C., & Lewis, S. (2013). Derivational order in syntax: Evidence and architectural consequences. Studies in Linguistics, 6, 11–47.
   Google Scholar
• Protopapas, A. (2007). Check Vocal: A program to facilitate checking the accuracy and response time of vocal responses from DMDX. Behavior Research Methods, 39(4), 859–862. doi:10.3758/BF03192979
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheepers, C., & Crocker, M. W. (2004). Constituent order priming from reading to listening: A visual-world study. In M. Carreiras & C. J. Clifton (Eds.), The on-line study of sentence comprehension: eyetracking, ERP, and beyond (pp. 167–185). New York: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schluroff, M. (1982). Pupil responses to grammatical complexity of sentences. Brain and Language, 17(1), 133–145. doi: 10.1016/0093-934X(82)90010-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tannenbaum, P. H., & Williams, F. (1968). Generation of active and passive sentences as a function of subject or object focus. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 7(1), 246–250. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(68)80197-5
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, V., Jescheniak, J. D., & Schriefers, H. (2010). On the flexibility of grammatical advance planning during sentence production: Effects of cognitive load on multiple lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 36(2), 423–440. doi:10.1037/a0018619
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar