The importance of studying the role of filled pauses in the construction of a coherent representation of spontaneous spoken discourse

References

• Arnold, J. E., Hudson Kam, C. L., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2007). If you say thee uh- you are describing something hard: The on-line attribution of disfluency during reference comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33(5), 914–930. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.5.914
   Google Scholar
• Arnold, J. E., Tanenhaus, M. K., Altmann, R., & Fagnano, M. (2004). The old and thee, uh, new. Psychological Science, 15(9), 578–582. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00723.x
   Google Scholar
• Arnold, J. E., Wasow, T., Losongco, T., & Ginstrom, R. (2000). Heaviness vs. Newness: The effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering. Language, 76(1), 28–55. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2000.0045
   Google Scholar
• Bailey, K. G. D., & Ferreira, F. (2003). Disfluencies affect the parsing of garden-path sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 49(2), 183–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00027-5
   Google Scholar
• Barr, D., & Seyfeddinipur, M. (2010). The role of fillers in listener attributions for speaker disfluency. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25(4), 441–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960903047122
   Google Scholar
• Beker, K., Jolles, D., & van den Broek, P. W. (2017). Meaningful learning from texts: The construction of knowledge representations. In J. A. León & I. Escudero (Eds.), Reading comprehension in educational settings. Book series: Studies in written language and literacy no. 16 (pp. 29–62). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/swll.16.02bek
   Google Scholar
• Benus, S., Enos, F., Hirschberg, J., & Shriberg, E. (2006). Pauses in deceptive speech [Paper presentation]. ISCA 3rd International Conference on Speech Prosody, Dresden, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Bohn-Gettler, C. M. (2019). Getting a grip: The PET framework for studying how reader emotions influence comprehension. Discourse Processes, 56(5-6), 386–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2019.1611174
   Google Scholar
• Bohn-Gettler, C. M., & Rapp, D. N. (2011). Depending on my mood: Mood-driven influences on text comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(3), 562–577. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023458
   Google Scholar
• Bortfeld, H., Leon, S. D., Bloom, J. E., Schober, F., & Brennan, S. E. (2001). Disfluency rates in conversation: Effects of age, relationship, topic role, and gender. Language and Speech, 44(2), 123–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309010440020101
   Google Scholar
• Bosker, H. R., Quené, H., Sanders, T., & de Jong, N. H. (2014). Native ‘um’s elicit prediction of low-frequency referents, but non-native ‘um’s do not. Journal of Memory and Language, 75, 104–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2014.05.004
   Google Scholar
• Brennan, S., & Schober, M. (2001). How listeners compensate for disfluencies in spontaneous speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 44(2), 274–296. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2753
   Google Scholar
• Brennan, S. E., & Williams, M. (1995). The feeling of another’s knowing: Prosody and filled pauses as cues to listeners about the metacognitive states of speakers. Journal of Memory and Language, 34(3), 383–398. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1995.1017
   Google Scholar
• Butterworth, B. (1975). Hesitation and semantic planning in speech. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 4(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01066991
   Google Scholar
• Cevasco, J. (2009). The role of connectives in the comprehension of spontaneous spoken discourse. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 12(1), 56–65. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1138741600001475
   Google Scholar
• Cevasco, J., Bermejo, F., & Muller, F. (2017). Facilitation of the comprehension of written and spoken discourse. Psychology & Education Journal, 14(2), 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Cevasco, J., Muller, F., & Bermejo, F. (2020). Comprehension of topic shifts by Argentinean college students: Role of discourse marker presence, causal connectivity and prior knowledge. Current Psychology, 39(3), 1072–1085. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-9828-4
   Google Scholar
• Cevasco, J., & van den Broek, P. (2008). The importance of causal connections in the comprehension of spontaneous spoken discourse. Psicothema, 20(4), 801–806.
   Google Scholar
• Cevasco, J., & van den Broek, P. (2013). Studies on the establishment of connections among spoken statements: What can they contribute to the promotion of students’ construction of a coherent discourse representation? Revista de Psicología Educativa, 19(2), 67–74. https://doi.org/10.5093/ed2013a12
   Google Scholar
• Cevasco, J., & van den Broek, P. (2016). The effect of filled pauses on the processing of the surface form and the establishment of causal connections during the comprehension of spoken expository discourse. Cognitive Processing, 17(2), 185–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-016-0755-8
   Google Scholar
• Cevasco, J., & van den Broek, P. (2017). The importance of causality processing in the comprehension of spontaneous spoken discourse. Ciencia Cognitiva, 11, 43–45.
   Google Scholar
• Cevasco, J., & Van Den Broek, P. (2019). Contributions of causality processing models to the study of discourse comprehension and the facilitation of student learning. Psicología Educativa, 25, 159–168.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Christenfeld, N. (1995). Does it hurt to say um? Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 19(3), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02175503
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H., & Fox Tree, J. E. (2002). Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition, 84(1), 73–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00017-3
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H., & Wasow, T. (1998). Repeating words in spontaneous speech. Cognitive Psychology, 37(3), 201–242. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1998.0693
   Google Scholar
• Collard, P., Corley, M., MacGregor, L. J., & Donaldson, D. I. (2008). Attention orienting effects of hesitations in speech: Evidence from ERPs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(3), 696–702. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.34.3.696
   Google Scholar
• Corley, M. (2010). Making predictions from speech with repairs: Evidence from eye movements. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25(5), 706–727. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960903512489
   Google Scholar
• Corley, M., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2003). Hesitation in speech can … um … help a listener understand. In R. Alterman & D. Kirsh (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-fifth meeting of the cognitive science society (pp. 276–281). Cognitive Science Society.
   Google Scholar
• Corley, M., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Perc, M. (2011). Why um helps auditory word recognition: The temporal delay hypothesis. PLoS One, 6(5), e19792. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0019792
   Google Scholar
• Corley, M., MacGregor, L. J., & Donaldson, D. I. (2007). It’s the way that you, er, say it: Hesitations in speech affect language comprehension. Cognition, 105(3), 658–668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.10.010
   Google Scholar
• Crible, L., & Pascual, E. S. (2020). Combinations of discourse markers with repairs and repetitions in English, French and spanish. Journal of Pragmatics, 156, 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.05.002
   Google Scholar
• De Jong, N. H. (2016). Predicting pauses in L1 and L2 speech: The effects of utterance boundaries and word frequency. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 54(2), 113–132. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2016-9993
   Google Scholar
• de Simone, J., & Cevasco, J. (2021). The role of the establishment of causal connections and the modality of presentation of discourse in the generation of emotion inferences by Argentine college students. Reading Psychology, 42(1), 22–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2020.1837314
   Google Scholar
• Espin, C., Cevasco, J., van den Broek, P., Baker, S., & Gersten, R. (2007). History as narrative: The nature and quality of historical understanding for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40(2), 174–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194070400020801
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F. (2000). Syntax in language production: An approach using tree-adjoining grammars. In L. Wheeldon (Ed.), Studies in cognition series. Aspects of language production (pp. 291–330). Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F. (1994). Why study spoken language processing. In M. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics. Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fox Tree, J. E. (1995). The effects of false starts and repetitions on the processing of subsequent words in spontaneous speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 34(6), 709–738. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1995.1032
   Google Scholar
• Fox Tree, J. E. (2001). Listeners’ uses ofum anduh in speech comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 29(2), 320–326. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194926
   Google Scholar
• Fox Tree, J. E. (2002). Interpreting pauses and Ums at turn exchanges. Discourse Processes, 34(1), 37–55. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326950DP3401_2
   Google Scholar
• Fraundorf, S. H., & Watson, D. G. (2011). The disfluent discourse: Effects of filled pauses on recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 65(2), 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.03.004
   Google Scholar
• Fraundorf, S. H., & Watson, D. G. (2014). Alice’s adventures in um-derland: Psycholinguistic sources of variation in disfluency production. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(9), 1083–1096. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2013.832785
   Google Scholar
• Fraundorf, S. H., & Watson, D. G. (2008). Dimensions of variation in disfluency production in discourse). In J. Ginzburg, P. Healey, & Y. Sato (Eds.), Proceedings of LONDIAL 2008, the 12th workshop on the semantics and pragmatics of dialogue (pp. 131–138). King’s College London.
   Google Scholar
• Gillioz, C., & Gygax, P. (2017). Specificity of emotion inferences as a function of emotional contextual support. Discourse Processes, 54(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2015.1095597
   Google Scholar
• Golding, J. M., Millis, K. K., Hauselt, J. H., & Sego, S. A. (1995). The effect of connectives and causal relatedness on text comprehension. In R. F. Lorch & E. J. O’Brian (Eds.), Sources of coherence in text comprehension (pp. 127–143). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Goldman-Eisler, F. (1961). A comparative study of two hesitation phenomena. Language and Speech, 4(1), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/002383096100400102
   Google Scholar
• Goldman, S. R., & Varnhagen, C. K. (1986). Memory for embedded and sequential story structures. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(4), 401–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(86)90034-3
   Google Scholar
• Gorman, K., Olson, L., Hill, A. P., Lunsford, R., Heeman, P. A., & Van Santen, J. P.. (2016). Uh and um in children with autism spectrum disorders or language impairment. Autism Research, 9(8), 854–865.
   Google Scholar
• Graesser, A. C., Millis, K. K., & Zwaan, R. A. (1997). Discourse comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology, 48(1), 163–189. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.163
   Google Scholar
• Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101(3), 371–395. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.3.371
   Google Scholar
• Hay, J., Warren, P., & Drager, K. (2006). Factors influencing speech perception in the context of a merger-in-progress. Journal of Phonetics, 34(4), 458–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2005.10.001
   Google Scholar
• Irvine, C. A., Eigsti, I. M., & Fein, D. A. (2016). Uh, um, and autism: Filler disfluencies as pragmatic markers in adolescents with optimal outcomes from autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(3), 1061–1070. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2651-y
   Google Scholar
• Kahng, J. (2013). Investigating utterance fluency and cognitive fluency in second language speech. In Presentation at the new sounds 2013 conference. Montréal, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Kahng, J. (2018). The effect of pause location on perceived fluency. Applied Psycholinguistics, 39(3), 569–591. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716417000534
   Google Scholar
• Kahng, J. (2020). Explaining second language utterance fluency: Contribution of cognitive fluency and first language utterance fluency. Applied Psycholinguistics, 41(2), 457–480. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716420000065
   Google Scholar
• Karlsson, J., Jolles, D., Koornneef, A., van den Broek, P., & Van Leijenhorst, L. (2019). Individual differences in children’s comprehension of temporal relations: Dissociable contributions of working memory capacity and working memory updating. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 185, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2019.04.007
   Google Scholar
• Karlsson, J., van den Broek, P., Helder, A., Hickendorff, M., Koornneef, A., & van Leijenhorst, L. (2018). Profiles of young readers: Evidence from thinking aloud while reading narrative and expository texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 67, 105–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.08.001
   Google Scholar
• Kendeou, P., van den Broek, P., Helder, A., & Karlsson, J. (2014). A cognitive view of reading comprehension: Implications for reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 29(1), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12025
   Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kleijn, S., Pander Maat, H. L., & Sanders, T. J. (2019). Comprehension effects of connectives across texts, readers, and coherence relations. Discourse Processes, 56(5-6), 447–464. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2019.1605257
   Google Scholar
• Lake, J. K., Humphreys, K. R., & Cardy, S. (2011). Listener vs. speaker-oriented aspects of speech: Studying the disfluencies of individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(1), 135–140. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-010-0037-x
   Google Scholar
• Lennon, P. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning, 40, 387–417.
   Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. J. M. (1984). Some perceptual limitations on talking about space. In A. van Doom, W. van de Grind, & J. Koenderink (Eds.), Limits of perception: Essays in honour of Maarten A. Bouman (pp. 323–358). VNU Science Press.
   Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. J. M. (1983). Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition, 14, 41–104.
   Google Scholar
• Linderholm, T., Virtue, S., Tzeng, Y., & van den Broek, P. (2004). Fluctuations in the availability of information during reading: Capturing cognitive processes using the landscape model. Discourse Processes, 37(2), 165–186. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3702_5.
   Google Scholar
• London, J. (1903). The call of the wild. Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Lowder, M. W., & Ferreira, F. (2016). Prediction in the processing of repair disfluencies: Evidence from the visual-world paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(9), 1400–1416. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000256
   Google Scholar
• Lowder, M. W., & Ferreira, F. (2019). I see what you meant to say: Anticipating speech errors during online sentence processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(10), 1849–1858. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000544
   Google Scholar
• Lowder, M. W., Maxfield, N. D., & Ferreira, F. (2020). Processing of self-repairs in stuttered and non-stuttered speech. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 35(1), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1628284
   Google Scholar
• MacFarlane, H., Gorman, K., Ingham, R., Hill, A. P., Papadakis, K., Kiss, G., & van Santen, J. (2017). Quantitative analysis of disfluency in children with autism spectrum disorder or language impairment. PLoS ONE, 12(3), e0173936. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173936
   Google Scholar
• MacGregor, L. J., Corley, M., & Donaldson, D. I. (2009). Not all disfluencies are equal: The effects of disfluent repetitions on language comprehension. Brain and Language, 111(1), 36–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2009.07.003
   Google Scholar
• Maclay, H., & Osgood, C. E. (1959). Hesitation phenomena in spontaneous English speech. Word, 15(1), 19–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1959.11659682
   Google Scholar
• Marslen-Wilson, W., & Tyler, L. K. (1980). The temporal structure of spoken language understanding. Cognition, 8(1), 1–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(80)90015-3
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J., & Strange, W. (1968). The perception of hesitation in spontaneous speech. Perception and Psychophysics, 53, 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Inference during reading. Psychological Review, 99(3), 440–466. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.99.3.440
   Google Scholar
• McMaster, K. L., Espin, C. A., & van den Broek, P. (2014). Making connections: Linking cognitive psychology and intervention research to improve comprehension of struggling readers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(1), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12026
   Google Scholar
• McMaster, K., van den Broek, P., Espin, E., White, M. J., Rapp, D., Kendeou, P., & Carlson, S. (2012). Making the right connections: Differential effects of reading intervention for subgroups of comprehenders. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(1), 100–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.11.017
   Google Scholar
• Molinari Marotto, C., Barreyro, J. P., Cevasco, J., & van den Broek, P. (2011). Generación de inferencias emocionales durante la comprensión de textos: Datos conductuales e implementación a través del modelo landscape. Escritos de Psicología / Psychological Writings, 4(1), 9–17. https://doi.org/10.5231/psy.writ.2011.1803
   Google Scholar
• Mouw, J. M., van Leijenhorst, L., Saab, N., Danel, M. S., & van den Broek, P. (2017). Contributions of emotion understanding to narrative comprehension in children and adults. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 14(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2016.1140641
   Google Scholar
• Noordman, L. G. M., & Vonk, W. (2015). Inference in discourse, psychology of. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (pp. 37–44). Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien, E. J., & Myers, J. L. (1987). The role of causal connections in the retrieval of text. Memory & Cognition, 15(5), 419–427. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197731
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien, I, Segalowitz, N, Freed, B, & Collentine, J. (2007). Phonological memory predicts second language oral fluency gains in adults. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(4), 557–582.
   Google Scholar
• Parish-Morris, J., Liberman, M. Y., Cieri, C., Herrington, J. D., Yerys, B. E., Bateman, L., Donaher, J., Ferguson, E., Pandey, J., & Schultz, R. T. (2017). Linguistic camouflage in girls with autism spectrum disorder. Molecular Autism, 8(1), 48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13229-017-0164-6
   Google Scholar
• Pavias, M., van den Broek, P., Hickendorff, M., Beker, K., & van Leijenhorst, L. (2016). Effects of social-cognitive processing demands and structural importance on narrative recall: Differences between children, adolescents, and adults. Discourse Processes, 53(5-6), 488–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1171070
   Google Scholar
• Radvansky, G., Tamplin, A., Armendarez, J., & Thompson, A. (2014). Different kinds of causality in event cognition. Discourse Processes, 51(7), 601–618. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2014.903366
   Google Scholar
• Rapp, D. N., & Taylor, H. A. (2004). Interactive dimensions in the construction of mental representations for text. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(5), 988–1001. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.5.988
   Google Scholar
• Rinck, M., & Weber, U. (2003). Who when where: An experimental test of the event-indexing model. Memory & Cognition, 31(8), 1284–1292. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195811
   Google Scholar
• Rose, R., & Watanabe, M. (2019). A crosslinguistic corpus study of silent and filled pauses: When do speakers use filled pauses to fill pauses? [Poster presentation]. The 19th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS), Melbourne, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Schachter, S., Christenfeld, N., Ravina, B., & Bilous, F. (1991). Speech disfluency and the structure of knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(3), 362–367. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.3.362
   Google Scholar
• Segalowitz, N. (2010). Cognitive bases ofsecond language fluency. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Shriberg, E. E. (1996). Disfluencies in switchboard. In: Proceedings of the international conference in spoken language processing, Addendum (pp. 11–14).
   Google Scholar
• Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510–532. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp047
   Google Scholar
• Smith, V. L., & Clark, H. H. (1993). On the course of answering questions. Journal of Memory and Language, 32(1), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1993.1002
   Google Scholar
• Sparks, J. R., & Rapp, D. N. (2010). Discourse processing—examining our everyday language experiences. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1(3), 371–381. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.11
   Google Scholar
• Swerts, M. (1998). Filled pauses as markers of discourse structure. Journal of Pragmatics, 30(4), 485–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00014-9
   Google Scholar
• Tavakoli, P. (2011). Pausing patterns: Differences between L2 learners and native speakers. ELT Journal, 65(1), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq020
   Google Scholar
• Tian, Y., Maruyama, T., & Ginzburg, J. (2017). Self addressed questions and filled pauses: A cross-linguistic investigation. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 46(4), 905–922. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-016-9468-5
   Google Scholar
• Tottie, G. (2011). Errors and disfluencies in spoken corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16(2), 173–197. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.16.2.02tot
   Google Scholar
• Trabasso, T., & Sperry, L. L. (1985). Causal relatedness and importance of story events. Journal of Memory and Language, 24(5), 595–611. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(85)90048-8
   Google Scholar
• Trabasso, T., & van den Broek, P. (1985). Causal thinking and the representation of narrative events. Journal of Memory and Language, 24(5), 612–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(85)90049-X
   Google Scholar
• Trevors, G., Kendeou, P., & Butterfuss, R. (2017). Emotion processes in knowledge revision. Discourse Processes, 54(5-6), 406–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2017.1312201
   Google Scholar
• van den Broek, P. (2010). Using texts in science education: Cognitive processes and knowledge representation. Science, 328(5977), 453–456. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1182594
   Google Scholar
• Van Den Broek, P. (1990). The causal inference maker: Towards a process of inference generation in text comprehension. In D. A. Balota, G. B. Flores d’Arcais, & K. Rayner (Eds.), Comprehension Processes in Reading (pp. 423–445). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• van den Broek, P., & Helder, A. (2017). Cognitive processes in discourse comprehension: Passive processes, reader-initiated processes, and evolving mental representations. Discourse Processes, 54(5-6), 360–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2017.1306677
   Google Scholar
• van den Broek, P., Helder, A., & van Leijenhorst, L. (2013). Sensitivity to structural centrality: Developmental and individual differences in reading comprehension skills. In M. A. Britt, S. R. Goldman, & J. F. Rouet (Eds.), Reading: From words to multiple texts (pp. 132–146). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
   Google Scholar
• van den Broek, P., & Trabasso, T. (1986). Causal network versus goal hierarchies in summarizing text. Discourse Processes, 9(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638538609544628
   Google Scholar
• van Moort, M. L., Koornneef, A., & van den Broek, P. W. (2021). Differentiating text-based and knowledge-based validation processes during reading: Evidence from eye movements. Discourse Processes, 58(1), 22–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2020.1727683
   Google Scholar
• Watanabe, M., Hirose, K., Den, Y., & Minematsu, N. (2008). Filled pauses as cues to the complexity of upcoming phrases for native and non-native listeners. Speech Communication, 50(2), 81–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2007.06.002
   Google Scholar
• Wroblewski, K., & Vegiersky, S. (2003). Buenos Aires corpus of Argentine writers’ interviews. Cultural Institute of Recoleta.
   Google Scholar
• Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 162–185. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.123.2.162
   Google Scholar
• Zwaan, R. A., & Rapp, D. N. (2006). Discourse comprehension. In M. A. Gernsbacher & M. J. Traxler (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (2nd ed., pp. 725–764). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar