Is children's reading “good enough”? Links between online processing and comprehension as children read syntactically ambiguous sentences

REFERENCES

• Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baines, L. (1996). From page to screen: When a novel is interpreted for film, what gets lost in the translation? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39, 612–622.
   Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing : Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
   Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2013). lme4: Linear mixed effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999999–2. Retrieved from http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/index.html
   Google Scholar
• Christianson, K., Hollingworth, A., Halliwell, J. F., & Ferreira, F. (2001). Thematic roles assigned along the garden path linger. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 368–407. doi: 10.1006/cogp.2001.0752
   Google Scholar
• Christianson, K., & Luke, S. G. (2011). Context strengthens initial misinterpretations of text. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15, 136–166. doi: 10.1080/10888431003636787
   Google Scholar
• Ehrlich, M. F., Remond, M., & Tardieu, H. (1999). Processing of anaphoric devices in young skilled and less skilled comprehenders: Differences in metacognitive monitoring. Reading and Writing, 11(1), 29–63. doi: 10.1023/A:1007996502372
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., Bailey, K. G. D., & Ferraro, V. (2002). Good-enough representations in language comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 11–15. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.00158
   Google Scholar
• Frazier, L. (1987). Syntactic processing: Evidence from Dutch. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 5, 519–559. doi: 10.1007/BF00138988
   Google Scholar
• Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 178–210. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(82)90008-1
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, D. P. (1988). Speaking and writing: Distinct patterns of word choice. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 572–585. doi: 10.1016/0749-596X(88)90027-7
   Google Scholar
• Hill, R. L., & Murray, W. S. (2000). Commas and spaces: Effects of punctuation on eye movements and sentence parsing. In A. Kennedy, R. Radach, D. Heller, & J. Pynte (Eds.), Reading as a perceptual process (pp. 565–589). Oxford: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Hirotani, M., Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (2006). Punctuation and intonation effects on clause and sentence wrap-up: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 425–443. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.001
   Google Scholar
• Hyönä, J., Lorch, R. F. Jr., & Kaakinen, J. K. (2002). Individual differences in reading to summarize expository text: Evidence from eye fixation patterns. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 44–55. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.94.1.44
   Google Scholar
• Inhoff, A. W., & Weger, U. W. (2005). Memory for word location during reading: Eye movements to previously read words are spatially selective but not precise. Memory & Cognition, 33, 447–461. doi: 10.3758/BF03193062
   Google Scholar
• Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434–446. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007
   Google Scholar
• Joseph, H. S., & Liversedge, S. P. (2013). Children's and adults’ on-line processing of syntactically ambiguous sentences during reading. PLoS ONE, 8, e54141. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054141
   Google Scholar
• Kaschak, M. P., & Glenberg, A. M. (2004). This construction needs learned. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 450–467. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.3.450
   Google Scholar
• Kidd, E., & Bavin, E. L. (2007). Lexical and referential influences on on-line spoken language comprehension: A comparison of adults and primary-school-age children. First Language, 27, 29–52. doi: 10.1177/0142723707067437
   Google Scholar
• Kidd, E., Stewart, A. J., & Serratrice, L. (2011). Children do not overcome lexical biases where adults do: The role of the referential scene in garden-path recovery. Journal of Child Language, 38, 222–234. doi: 10.1017/S0305000909990316
   Google Scholar
• MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676–703. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.101.4.676
   Google Scholar
• McConkie, G. W., Zola, D., Grimes, J., Kerr, P. W., Bryant, N. R., & Wolff, P. M. (1991). Children's eye movements during reading. In J. F. Stein (Ed.), Vision and visual dyslexia (pp. 251–262). London: Macmillan Press.
   Google Scholar
• McRae, K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 283–312. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1997.2543
   Google Scholar
• Meseguer, E., Carreiras, M., & Clifton, C. (2002). Overt reanalysis strategies and eye movements during the reading of mild garden path sentences. Memory & Cognition, 30, 551–561. doi: 10.3758/BF03194956
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, D. C., & Holmes, V. M. (1985). The role of specific information about the verb in parsing sentences with local structural ambiguity. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 542–559. doi: 10.1016/0749-596X(85)90045-2
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, D. C., Shen, X., Green, M. J., & Hodgson, T. L. (2008). Accounting for regressive eye-movements in models of sentence processing: A reappraisal of the Selective Reanalysis hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 266–293. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2008.06.002
   Google Scholar
• Murray, W. S., & Kennedy, A. (1988). Spatial coding in the processing of anaphor by good and poor readers: Evidence from eye movement analyses. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 40(4), 693–718. doi: 10.1080/14640748808402294
   Google Scholar
• Patson, N. D., Darowski, E. S., Moon, N., & Ferreira, F. (2009). Lingering misinterpretations in garden-path sentences: Evidence from a paraphrasing task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 280–285.
   Google Scholar
• Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 357–383. doi: 10.1080/10888430701530730
   Google Scholar
• Pickering, M. J., & Traxler, M. J. (1998). Plausibility and recovery from garden paths: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 940–961.
   Google Scholar
• Pickering, M. J., Traxler, M. J., & Crocker, M. W. (2000). Ambiguity resolution in sentence processing: Evidence against frequency-based accounts. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 447–475. doi: 10.1006/jmla.2000.2708
   Google Scholar
• Quené, H., & Van den Bergh, H. (2008). Examples of mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects and with binomial data. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 413–425. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2008.02.002
   Google Scholar
• Rayner, K. (1986). Eye movements and the perceptual span in beginning and skilled readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 41(2), 211–236. doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(86)90037-8
   Google Scholar
• Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372–422. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372
   Google Scholar
• Rayner, K., Kambe, G., & Duffy, S. A. (2000). The effect of clause wrap-up on eye movements during reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53(4), 1061–1080. doi: 10.1080/713755934
   Google Scholar
• Rayner, K., Pollatsek, A., Ashby, J., & Clifton, C. (2012). The psychology of reading (2nd ed.). New York: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• R Development Core Team (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/
   Google Scholar
• Schroeder, S. (2011). What readers have and do: Effects of students’ verbal ability and reading time components on comprehension with and without text availability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 877–896. doi: 10.1037/a0023731
   Google Scholar
• Slattery, T. J., Sturt, P., Christianson, K., Yoshida, M., & Ferreira, F. (2013). Lingering misinterpretations of garden path sentences arise from competing syntactic representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 69, 104–120. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2013.04.001
   Google Scholar
• Snedeker, J., & Trueswell, J. C. (2004). The developing constraints on parsing decisions: The role of lexical-biases and referential scenes in child and adult sentence processing. Cognitive Psychology, 49, 238–299. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2004.03.001
   Google Scholar
• Steinhauer, K., & Friederici, A. D. (2001). Prosodic boundaries, comma rules, and brain responses: The closure positive shift in ERPs as a universal marker for prosodic phrasing in listeners and readers. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 267–295. doi: 10.1023/A:1010443001646
   Google Scholar
• Sturt, P. (2007). Semantic re-interpretation and garden path recovery. Cognition, 105, 477–488. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.10.009
   Google Scholar
• Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R., & Rashotte, C. (1999). Test of word reading efficiency (TOWRE). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
   Google Scholar
• Traxler, M. J. (2002). Plausibility and subcategorization preference in children's processing of temporarily ambiguous sentences: Evidence from self-paced reading. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 55, 75–96. doi: 10.1080/02724980143000172
   Google Scholar
• Trueswell, J. C., Sekerina, I., Hill, N. M., & Logrip, M. L. (1999). The kindergarten-path effect: Studying on-line sentence processing in young children. Cognition, 73, 89–134. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00032-3
   Google Scholar
• Trueswell, J. C., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1994). Toward a lexicalist framework for constraint-based syntactic ambiguity resolution. In C. Clifton, L. Frazier, & K. Rayner (Eds.), Perspectives in sentence processing (pp. 155–179). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Van Gompel, R. P., & Pickering, M. J. (2007). Syntactic parsing. In M. G. Gaskell (Ed.), Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 289–307). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• van Gompel, R. P., Pickering, M. J., Pearson, J., & Jacob, G. (2006). The activation of inappropriate analyses in garden-path sentences: Evidence from structural priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 335–362. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2006.06.004
   Google Scholar
• von der Malsburg, T., & Vasishth, S. (2011). What is the scanpath signature of syntactic reanalysis? Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 109–127. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2011.02.004
   Google Scholar
• Weighall, A. R. (2008). The kindergarten-path effect revisited: Children's use of context in processing structural ambiguities. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 99, 75–95. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2007.10.004
   Google Scholar