Executive function and intelligence in the resolution of temporary syntactic ambiguity: an individual differences investigation

References

• Ackerman, P. L., Beier, M. E., & Boyle, M. O. (2005). Working memory and intelligence: The same or different constructs? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 30–60. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.131.1.30
   Google Scholar
• Adlof, S. M., Catts, H. W., & Little, T. D. (2006). Should the simple view of reading include a fluency component? Reading and Writing, 19(9), 933–958. doi: 10.1007/s11145-006-9024-z
   Google Scholar
• American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, S. W., Damasio, H., Jones, R. D., & Tranel, D. (1991). Wisconsin card sorting performance as a measure of frontal lobe damage. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 13, 909–922. doi: 10.1080/01688639108405107
   Google Scholar
• Arbuthnott, K., & Frank, J. (2000). The trail making test, Part B as a measure of executive control: Validation using a set-shifting paradigm. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology (Neuropsychology, Development and Cognition: Section A), 22, 518–528. doi: 10.1076/1380-3395(200008)22:4;1-0;FT518
   Google Scholar
• Ardila, A., Pineda, D., & Rosselli, M. (2000). Correlation between intelligence test scores and executive function measures. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 15, 31–36. doi: 10.1093/arclin/15.1.31
   Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for participants and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
   Google Scholar
• Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working memory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baddeley, A. D. (1996). Exploring the central executive. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 5–28. doi: 10.1080/713755608
   Google Scholar
• Baddeley, A. D., & Logie, R. H. (1999). Working memory: The multicomponent model. In A. Miyake & P. Shah (Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 28–61). New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barkley, R. A. (1997). Behavioral inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions: Constructing a unifying theory of ADHD. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 65–94. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.65
   Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J. (2008). Analyzing ‘visual world’ eyetracking data using multilevel logistic regression. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 457–474. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.09.002
   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, T. C., & Stough, C. (1997). Processing speed, attention, and intelligence: Effects of spatial attention on decisions time in high and low IQ subjects. Personality & Individual Differences, 23(5), 861–868. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00089-5
   Google Scholar
• Bickley, P. G., Keith, T. Z., & Wolfle, L. M. (1995). The three-stratum theory of cognitive abilities: Test of the structure of intelligence across the life span. Intelligence, 20, 309–328. doi: 10.1016/0160-2896(95)90013-6
   Google Scholar
• Blair, C. (2006). How similar are fluid cognition and general intelligence? A developmental neuroscience perspective on fluid cognition as an aspect of human cognitive ability. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 29, 109–160.
   Google Scholar
• Booth, J. N., & Boyle, J. M. (2009). The role of inhibitory functioning in children’s reading skills. Educational Psychology in Practice, 25(4), 339–350. doi: 10.1080/02667360903315164
   Google Scholar
• Brown, W. (1910). Some experimental results in the correlation of mental abilities. British Journal of Psychology, 3, 296–322.
   Google Scholar
• Burgess, G. C., Gray, J. R., Conway, A. R. A., & Braver, T. S. (2011). Neural mechanisms of interference control underlie the relationship between fluid intelligence and working memory span. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140(4), 674–692. doi: 10.1037/a0024695
   Google Scholar
• Burgess, P. W. (1997). Theory and methodology in executive function research. In P. Rabbitt (Ed.), Methodology of frontal and executive function (pp. 81–116). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burgess, P. W., Alderman, N., Evans, J., Emslie, H., & Wilson, B. A. (1998). The ecological validity of tests of executive function. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 4, 547–558. doi: 10.1017/S1355617798466037
   Google Scholar
• Caplan, D., & Waters, G. S. (1999). Verbal working memory and sentence comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 77–94.
   Google Scholar
• Caplan, D., & Waters, G. S. (2002). Working memory and connectionist models of parsing: A response to MacDonald and Christiansen. Psychological Review, 109, 66–74. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.109.1.66
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Casey, B. J., Castellanos, X., Giedd, J., Marsh, W., Hamburger, S., Schubert, A., … Rapoport, J. L. (1997). Involvement of right fronto-striatal circuitry in response inhibition deficits of ADHD. Journal of the American Academy for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 36, 374–383. doi: 10.1097/00004583-199703000-00016
   Google Scholar
• Chiappe, P., Hasher, L., & Siegel, L. S. (2000). Working memory, inhibitory control, and reading disability. Memory and Cognition, 28, 8–17. doi: 10.3758/BF03211570
   Google Scholar
• Christianson, K., Hollingworth, A., Halliwell, J., & 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., Williams, C. C., Zacks, R. T., & Ferreira, F. (2006). Younger and older adults’ good enough interpretations of garden path sentences. Discourse Processes, 42(2), 205–238. doi: 10.1207/s15326950dp4202_6
   Google Scholar
• Colom, R., Rebollo, I., Palacios, A., Juan-Espinosa, M., & Kyllonen, P. C. (2004). Working memory is (almost) perfectly predicted by g. Intelligence, 32, 277–296. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2003.12.002
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1990). Assessing print exposure and orthographic processing skill in children: A quick measure of reading experience. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 733–740. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.82.4.733
   Google Scholar
• Czerlinski, J. G., Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1999). How good are simple heuristics? In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd, and the ABC Research Group (Eds.), Simple heuristics that make us smarter (pp. 97–118). New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 19(4), 450–466. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6
   Google Scholar
• Daneman, M., & Merikle, P. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 422–433. doi: 10.3758/BF03214546
   Google Scholar
• Das, J. P. (2002). A better look at intelligence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 28–33. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.00162
   Google Scholar
• Deary, I. J. (2001). Intelligence: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deary, I. J., Der, G., & Ford, G. (2001). Reaction times and intelligence differences: A population-based cohort study. Intelligence, 29, 389–399. doi: 10.1016/S0160-2896(01)00062-9
   Google Scholar
• Dede, G., Caplan, D., Kemtes, K., & Waters, G. (2004). The relationship between age, verbal working memory, and language comprehension. Psychology and Aging, 19, 601–616. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.19.4.601
   Google Scholar
• Dempster, F. N. (1991). Inhibitory processes: A neglected dimension of intelligence. Intelligence, 15, 157–173. doi: 10.1016/0160-2896(91)90028-C
   Google Scholar
• Dempster, F. N., & Corkill, A. J. (1999). Individual differences in susceptibility to interference and general cognitive ability. Acta Psychologica, 101, 395–416. doi: 10.1016/S0001-6918(99)00013-X
   Google Scholar
• Denckla, M. B. (1996). A theory and model of executive function: A neuropsychological perspective. In G. R. Lyon & N. A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Attention, memory, and executive function (pp. 263–278). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Der, G., & Deary, I. J. (2003). IQ, reaction time, and the differentiation hypothesis. Intelligence, 31, 491–503. doi: 10.1016/S0160-2896(02)00189-7
   Google Scholar
• Duncan, J., Johnson, R., Swales, M., & Freer, C. (1997). Frontal lobe deficits after head injury: Unity and diversity of function. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 14, 713–741. doi: 10.1080/026432997381420
   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, 639–645. doi: 10.1080/17470210903469864
   Google Scholar
• Engelhardt, P. E., Nigg, J. T., Carr, L. A., & Ferreira, F. (2008). Cognitive inhibition and working memory in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117, 591–605. doi: 10.1037/a0012593
   Google Scholar
• Farmer, T. A., Anderson, S. E., & Spivey, M. J. (2007). Gradiency and visual context in syntactic garden-paths. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 570–595. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.04.003
   Google Scholar
• Fedorenko, E., Gibson, E., & Rohde, D. (2006). The nature of working memory capacity in sentence comprehension: Evidence against domain-specific resources. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 541–553. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.006
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F. (2003). The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 164–203. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0285(03)00005-7
   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
• Ferreira, F., Christianson, K., & Hollingworth, A. (2001). Misinterpretations of garden-path sentences: Implications for models of reanalysis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 3–20. doi: 10.1023/A:1005290706460
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., Engelhardt, P. E., & Jones, M. W. (2009). Good enough language processing: A satisficing approach. In N. Taatgen, H. Rijn, J. Nerbonne, & L. Schomaker (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 413–418). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., & Henderson, J. M. (1991). Recovery from misanalyses of garden-path sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 725–745. doi: 10.1016/0749-596X(91)90034-H
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., & Patson, N. (2007). The good enough approach to language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1, 71–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2007.00007.x
   Google Scholar
• Frazier, L., & Clifton, Jr., C. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, N. P., Haberstick, B. C., Willcutt, E. G., Miyake, A., Young, S. E., Corley, R. P., & Hewitt, J. K. (2007). Greater attention problems during childhood predict poorer executive functioning in late adolescence. Psychological Science, 18, 893–900. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01997.x
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, N. P., & Miyake, A. (2004). The relations among inhibition and interference control processes: A latent variable analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 101–135. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.1.101
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, N. P., Miyake, A., Corley, R. P., Young, S. E., DeFries, J. C., & Hewitt, J. K. (2006). Not all executive functions are related to intelligence. Psychological Science, 17, 172–179. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01681.x
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1–76. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00034-1
   Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, G. (2008). Why heuristics work. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 20–29. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00058.x
   Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1996). Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103, 650–669. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.103.4.650
   Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, G., & Selten, R. (2001). Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Golden, C. J. (1978). Stroop color and word test: A manual for clinical and experimental issues. Wood Dale, IL: Stoelting.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., Johnson, M., & Lee, Y. (2006). Similarity-based interference during language comprehension: Evidence from eye tracking during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 32, 1304–1321.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Levine, W. H. (2002). Memory-load interference in syntactic processing. Psychological Science, 13, 425–430. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00475
   Google Scholar
• Gray, J. R., Chabris, C. F., & Braver, T. S. (2003). Neural mechanisms of general fluid intelligence. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 316–322. doi: 10.1038/nn1014
   Google Scholar
• Guo, Y., Roehrig, A. D., & Williams, R. S. (2011). The relation of morphological awareness and syntactic awareness to adults’ reading comprehension is vocabulary knowledge a mediating variable? Journal of Literacy Research: A Publication of the Literacy Research Association, 43(2), 159–183. doi: 10.1177/1086296X11403086
   Google Scholar
• Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. T. (1988). Working memory, comprehension, and aging: A review and a new view. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 22, pp. 193–225). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heaton, R. K., Chelune, G. J., Talley, J. L., Kay, G. G., & Curtiss, G. (1993). Wisconsin card sorting test manual: Revised and expanded. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
   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
• January, D., Trueswell, J. C., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2009). Colocalization of Stroop and syntactic ambiguity resolution in Broca’s area: Implications for the neural basis of sentence processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21(12), 2434–2444. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2008.21179
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, T. C., & Kirby, J. R. (2006). The contribution of naming speed to the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 19(4), 339–361. doi: 10.1007/s11145-005-4644-2
   Google Scholar
• Joshi, R. M. (2005). Vocabulary: A critical component of comprehension. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 21(3), 209–219. doi: 10.1080/10573560590949278
   Google Scholar
• Joshi, R. M., & Aaron, P. G. (2000). The component model of reading: Simple view of reading made a little more complex. Reading Psychology, 21(2), 85–97. doi: 10.1080/02702710050084428
   Google Scholar
• Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99(1), 122–149. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.99.1.122
   Google Scholar
• Kane, M. J., Hambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O., Payne, T., Tuholski, S., & Engle, R. W. (2004). The generality of working memory capacity: A latent variable approach to verbal and visuo-spatial memory span and reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 189–217. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.2.189
   Google Scholar
• King, J., & Just, M. A. (1991). Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 580–602. doi: 10.1016/0749-596X(91)90027-H
   Google Scholar
• Kline, P. (1991). Intelligence: The psychometric view. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practices of structural equation modelling. New York: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Kuperman, V., & Van Dyke, J. A. (2011). Effects of individual differences in verbal skills on eye-movement patterns during sentence reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 42–73. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2011.03.002
   Google Scholar
• Lansbergen, M. M., Kenemans, J. L., & van Engeland, H. (2007). Stroop interference and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychology, 21, 251–262. doi: 10.1037/0894-4105.21.2.251
   Google Scholar
• Larson, G. E., Merritt, C. R., & Williams, S. E. (1988). Information processing and intelligence: Some implications of task complexity. Intelligence, 12, 131–147. doi: 10.1016/0160-2896(88)90012-8
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, R. L., & Vasishth, S. (2005). An activation-based model of sentence processing as skilled memory retrieval. Cognitive Science, 29, 375–419. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_25
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, R. L., Vasishth, S., & Van Dyke, J. A. (2006). Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 44–54.
   Google Scholar
• Logan, G. D. (1985). Executive control of thought and action. Acta Psychologica, 60, 193–210. doi: 10.1016/0001-6918(85)90055-1
   Google Scholar
• Logan, G. D. (1994). On the ability to inhibit thought and action: A user’s guide to the stop signal paradigm. In D. Dagenbach & T. H. Carr (Eds.), Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language (pp. 189–239). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Long, D. L., & Prat, C. S. (2002). Working memory and Stroop interference: An individual differences investigation. Memory & Cognition, 30(2), 294–301. doi: 10.3758/BF03195290
   Google Scholar
• MacDonald, M. C., & Christiansen, M. H. (2002). Reassessing working memory: A comment on Just & Carpenter (1992) and Waters & Caplan (1996). Psychological Review, 109(1), 35–54. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.109.1.35
   Google Scholar
• MacDonald, M. C., Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992). Working memory constraints on the processing of syntactic ambiguity. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 56–98. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(92)90003-K
   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
• Martel, M., Nikolas, M., & Nigg, J. T. (2007). Executive function in adolescents with ADHD. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 46, 1437–1444. doi: 10.1097/chi.0b013e31814cf953
   Google Scholar
• Martin, N. G. (2001). Genetic covariance among measures of information processing speed, working memory, and IQ. Behavior Genetics, 31, 581–592. doi: 10.1023/A:1013397428612
   Google Scholar
• May, C. P., Hasher, L., & Kane, M. J. (1999). The role of interference in memory span. Memory and Cognition, 27, 759–767. doi: 10.3758/BF03198529
   Google Scholar
• May, C. P., Zacks, R. T., Hasher, L., & Multhaup, K. S. (1999). Inhibition in the processing of garden path sentences. Psychology and Aging, 14, 304–313. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.14.2.304
   Google Scholar
• McCartney, K., Burchinal, M., & Bub, K. L. (Eds.). (2006). Best practices in quantitative methods for developmentalists. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 71.
   Google Scholar
• McElree, B., Foraker, S., & Dyer, L. (2003). Memory structures that subserve sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 67–91. doi: 10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00515-6
   Google Scholar
• Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (2012). The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions: Four general conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 8–14. doi: 10.1177/0963721411429458
   Google Scholar
• Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 49–100. doi: 10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
   Google Scholar
• Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Rettinger, D. A., Shah, P., & Hegarty, M. (2001). How are visuospatial working memory, executive functioning, and spatial abilities related? A latent variable analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 621–640. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.130.4.621
   Google Scholar
• Nation, K. (2009). Reading comprehension and vocabulary: What’s the connection? In Wagner, Schatchneider, & Phythian-Sence (Eds.), Reading comprehension: Approaches to understanding its behavioural and biological origins (pp. 179–194). New York, NY: Guildford Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Nigg, J. T. (2001). Is ADHD a disinhibtion disorder? Psychological Bulletin, 127, 571–598. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.127.5.571
   Google Scholar
• Nigg, J. T., Carr, L. A., Martel, M. M., & Henderson, J. M. (2007). Concepts of inhibition and developmental psychopathology. In C. MacCleod & D. Gorfein (Eds.), Inhibition in cognition (pp. 259–277). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.
   Google Scholar
• Novick, J. M., Trueswell, J. C., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2005). Cognitive control and parsing: Reexamining the role of Broca’s area in sentence comprehension. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 5(3), 263–281. doi: 10.3758/CABN.5.3.263
   Google Scholar
• Novick, J. M., Trueswell, J. C., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2010). Broca’s area and language processing: Evidence for the cognitive control connection. Language and Linguistics Compass, 4(10), 906–924. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2010.00244.x
   Google Scholar
• Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Partington, J. E., & Leiter, R. G. (1949). Partington’s pathway test. The Psychological Service Center Bulletin, 1, 9–20.
   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, & Cognition, 35, 280–285.
   Google Scholar
• Pennington, B. F., & Ozonoff, S. (1996). Executive functions and developmental psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 37, 51–87. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1996.tb01380.x
   Google Scholar
• Perfetti, C. A. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 357–383. doi: 10.1080/10888430701530730
   Google Scholar
• Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2002). The lexical quality hypothesis. In L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro, & P. Reitsma (Eds.), Precursors of functional literacy (pp. 189–213). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Prat, C. S., & Just, M. A. (2011). Exploring the neural dynamics underpinning individual differences in sentence comprehension. Cerebral Cortex, 21(8), 1747–1760. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhq241
   Google Scholar
• Protopapas, A., Archonti, A., & Skaloumbakas, C. (2007). Reading ability is negatively related to Stroop interference. Cognitive Psychology, 54(3), 251–282. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.07.003
   Google Scholar
• Protopapas, A., Mouzaki, A., Sideridis, G. D., Kotsolakou, A., & Simos, P. G. (2013). The role of vocabulary in the context of the simple view of reading. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 29(2), 168–202. doi: 10.1080/10573569.2013.758569
   Google Scholar
• Protopapas, A., Simos, P. G., Sideridis, G. D., & Mouzaki, A. (2012). The components of the simple view of reading: A confirmatory factor analysis. Reading Psychology, 33(3), 217–240. doi: 10.1080/02702711.2010.507626
   Google Scholar
• Rabbitt, P. (Ed.). (1997a). Methodology of frontal and executive function. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Reitan, R. M. (1958). Validity of the Trail Making Test as an indicator of organic brain damage. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 8, 271–276. doi: 10.2466/pms.1958.8.3.271
   Google Scholar
• Salthouse, T. A. (1996). The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. Psychological Review, 103, 403–428. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.103.3.403
   Google Scholar
• Sanford, A. J., & Sturt, P. (2002). Depth of processing in language comprehension: Not noticing the evidence. Trends in Cognitive Science, 6, 382–386. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01958-7
   Google Scholar
• Schachar, R., Tannock, R., Marriott, M., & Logan, G. D. (1995). Deficient inhibitory control and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 23, 411–437. doi: 10.1007/BF01447206
   Google Scholar
• Shafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147–177. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.7.2.147
   Google Scholar
• Spearman, C. (1927). The abilities of man. London: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Spearman, C. C. (1910). Correlation calculated from faulty data. British Journal of Psychology, 3, 271–295.
   Google Scholar
• Stevens, J. P. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662. doi: 10.1037/h0054651
   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
• Tannock, R., & Schachar, R. (1996). Executive dysfunction as an underlying mechanism of behavior and language problems in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. In J. Beitchman, N. Cohen, M. M. Konstantearas, & R. Tannock (Eds.), Language, learning, and behavior disorders (pp. 128–155). Cambridge: University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Teuber, H. L. (1972). Unity and diversity of frontal lobe functions. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis, 32, 615–656.
   Google Scholar
• Thurstone, L. L. (1935). The vectors of mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tiu, R. D., Thompson, L. A., & Lewis, B. A. (2003). The role of IQ in a component model of reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36(5), 424–436. doi: 10.1177/00222194030360050401
   Google Scholar
• Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2012). The simple view of reading redux: Vocabulary knowledge and the independent components hypothesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(5), 453–466. doi: 10.1177/0022219411432685
   Google Scholar
• Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131. doi: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
   Google Scholar
• Van Dyke, J. A., Johns, C. L., & Kukona, A. (2014). Low working memory capacity is only spuriously related to poor reading comprehension. Cognition, 131, 373–403. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.01.007
   Google Scholar
• Van Dyke, J. A., & McElree, B. (2006). Retrieval interference in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 157–166. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2006.03.007
   Google Scholar
• Van Gompel, R. P. G., 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
• Vuong, L. C., & Martin, R. C. (2013). Domain-specific executive control and the revision of misinterpretations in sentence comprehension. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 29, 312–325. doi: 10.1080/01690965.2013.836231
   Google Scholar
• Waters, G. S., & Caplan, D. (2001). Age, working memory, and on-line syntactic processing in sentence comprehension. Psychology and Aging, 16, 128–144. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.16.1.128
   Google Scholar
• Wechsler, D. (1997a). Wechsler adult intelligence scale (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Wechsler, D. (1997b). Wechsler intelligence scale for children (4th ed.). San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Wells, J. B., Christiansen, M. H., Race, D. S., Acheson, D. J., & MacDonald, M. C. (2009). Experience and sentence comprehension: Statistical learning and relative clause comprehension. Cognitive Psychology, 58, 250–271. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2008.08.002
   Google Scholar
• Wilcox, R. R., Keselman, H. J., & Kowalchuk, R. K. (1998). Can tests for treatment group equality be improved? The bootstrap and trimmed means conjecture. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 51, 123–134. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8317.1998.tb00670.x
   Google Scholar
• Wurm, L. H., & Fisicaro, S. A. (2014). What residualizing predictors in regression analyses does (and what it does not do). Journal of Memory and Language, 72, 37–48. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2013.12.003
   Google Scholar
• Ye, Z., & Zhou, X. (2009a). Conflict control during sentence comprehension: fMRI evidence. NeuroImage, 48, 280–90. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.06.032
   Google Scholar
• Ye, Z., & Zhou, X. (2009b). Executive control in language processing. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 33, 1168–1177. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.03.003
   Google Scholar