References
- Anderson, S. E., Farmer, T. A., Goldstein, M., Schwade, J., & Spivey, M. (2011). Individual differences in measures of linguistic experience account for variability in the sentence processing skill of five-year-olds. In I. Arnon, & E. V. Clark (Eds.), Experience, variation and generalization: Learning a first language (Vol. 7) (pp. 203–221). John Benjamins Publishing.
- Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. DOI:https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
- Borovsky, A., Elman, J. L., & Fernald, A. (2012). Knowing a lot for one’s age: Vocabulary skill and not age is associated with anticipatory incremental sentence interpretation in children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 112(4), 417–436. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.01.005
- Braze, D., Katz, L., Magnuson, J. S., Mencl, W. E., Tabor, W., Van Dyke, J. A., Gong, T., Johns, C., & Shankweiler, D. P. (2016). Vocabulary does not complicate the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 29(3), 435–451. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9608-6
- Braze, D., Tabor, W., Shankweiler, D. P., & Mencl, W. E. (2007). Speaking up for vocabulary: Reading skill differences in young adults. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40(3), 226–243. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194070400030401
- Chambers, C. G., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Magnuson, J. S. (2004). Actions and affordances in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(3), 687–696. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.3.687
- Coco, M. I., & Keller, F. (2015). The interaction of visual and linguistic saliency during syntactic ambiguity resolution. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(1), 46–74. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.936475
- Contemori, C., Pozzan, L., Galinsky, P., & Dussias, P. E. (2020). When actions and looks don’t line up: The contribution of referential and prosodic information in the processing of PP ambiguities in child-L2 speakers of English. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 10(5), 623–656. doi:https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.18001.con
- Duñabeitia, J. A., Crepaldi, D., Meyer, A. S., New, B., Pliatsikas, C., Smolka, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2018). Multipic: A standardized set of 750 drawings with norms for six European languages. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(4), 808–816. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2017.1310261
- Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, D. M. (2007). Peabody picture vocabulary test 4th edition (PPVT-4). Pearson.
- Engelhardt, P. E., Nigg, J. T., & Ferreira, F. (2017). Executive function and intelligence in the resolution of temporary syntactic ambiguity: An individual differences investigation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(7), 1263–1281. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2016.1178785
- Farmer, T. A., Anderson, S. E., & Spivey, M. J. (2007). Gradiency and visual context in syntactic garden-paths. Journal of Memory and Language, 57(4), 570–595. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.04.003
- Farmer, T. A., Cargill, S. A., Hindy, N. C., Dale, R., & Spivey, M. J. (2007). Tracking the continuity of language comprehension: Computer mouse trajectories suggest parallel syntactic processing. Cognitive Science, 31(5), 889–909. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/03640210701530797
- Ferreira, F., Foucart, A., & Engelhardt, P. E. (2013). Language processing in the visual world: Effects of preview, visual complexity, and prediction. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(3), 165–182. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.06.001
- Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. MIT Press.
- Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 178–210. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(82)90008-1
- Freed, E. M., Hamilton, S. T., & Long, D. L. (2017). Comprehension in proficient readers: The nature of individual variation. Journal of Memory and Language, 97, 135–153. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.07.008
- Hintz, F., Meyer, A. S., & Huettig, F. (2017). Predictors of verb-mediated anticipatory eye movements in the visual world. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43(9), 1352–1374. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000388
- Hsu, N. S., & Novick, J. M. (2016). Dynamic engagement of cognitive control modulates recovery from misinterpretation during real-time language processing. Psychological Science, 27(4), 572–582. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615625223
- Huettig, F., Rommers, J., & Meyer, A. S. (2011). Using the visual world paradigm to study language processing: A review and critical evaluation. Acta Psychologica, 137(2), 151–171. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.11.003
- Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99(1), 122–149. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.99.1.122
- Knoeferle, P., & Guerra, E. (2016). Visually situated language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass, 10(2), 66–82. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12177
- Kukona, A., Braze, D., Johns, C. L., Mencl, W. E., Van Dyke, J. A., Magnuson, J. S., … Tabor, W. (2016). The real-time prediction and inhibition of linguistic outcomes: Effects of language and literacy skill. Acta Psychologica, 171, 72–84. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.09.009
- MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101(4), 676–703. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.4.676
- 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(3), 283–312. doi:https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1997.2543
- Nakamura, C., Arai, M., Hirose, Y., & Flynn, S. (2020). An extra cue is beneficial for native speakers but can be disruptive for second language learners: Integration of prosody and visual context in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2835. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02835
- Novick, J. M., Hussey, E., Teubner-Rhodes, S., Harbison, J. I., & Bunting, M. F. (2014). Clearing the garden-path: Improving sentence processing through cognitive control training. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(2), 186–217. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2012.758297
- Novick, J. M., Thompson-Schill, S. L., & Trueswell, J. C. (2008). Putting lexical constraints in context into the visual-world paradigm. Cognition, 107(3), 850–903. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.12.011
- Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 357–383. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430701530730
- Pozzan, L., & Trueswell, J. C. (2016). Second language processing and revision of garden-path sentences: A visual word study. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(3), 636–643. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728915000838
- Qi, Z., Love, J., Fisher, C., & Brown-Schmidt, S. (2020). Referential context and executive functioning influence children’s resolution of syntactic ambiguity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(10), 1922–1947. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000886
- Rabagliati, H., Delaney-Busch, N., Snedeker, J., & Kuperberg, G. (2019). Spared bottom-up but impaired top-down interactive effects during naturalistic language processing in schizophrenia: Evidence from the visual-world paradigm. Psychological Medicine, 49(8), 1335–1345. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291718001952
- Rommers, J., Meyer, A. S., & Huettig, F. (2015). Verbal and nonverbal predictors of language-mediated anticipatory eye movements. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77(3), 720–730. doi:https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-0873-x
- Salverda, A. P., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2017). The visual world paradigm. In A. M. De Groot, & P. Hagoort (Eds.), Research methods in psycholinguistics: A practical guide (pp. 89–110). John Wiley & Sons.
- 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(3), 238–299. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2004.03.001
- Spivey, M. J., Grosjean, M., & Knoblich, G. (2005). From The cover: Continuous attraction toward phonological competitors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(29), 10393–10398. doi:https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0503903102
- Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268(5217), 1632–1634. doi:https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7777863
- Trueswell, J., & Tanenhaus, M. (1994). Toward a lexicalist framework for constraint-based syntacticambiguity resolution. In C. Clifton, L. Frazier, & K. Rayner (Eds.), Perspectives on sentence processing (pp. 155–179). Lawrence Erlbaum.
- 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(2), 89–134. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00032-3
- Van Dyke, J. A., Johns, C. L., & Kukona, A. (2014). Low working memory capacity is only spuriously related to poor reading comprehension. Cognition, 131(3), 373–403. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.01.007
- Weighall, A. R. (2008). The kindergarten path effect revisited: Children’s use of context in processing structural ambiguities. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 99(2), 75–95. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2007.10.004
- Woodard, K., Pozzan, L., & Trueswell, J. C. (2016). Taking your own path: Individual differences in executive function and language processing skills in child learners. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 141, 187–209. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2015.08.005
- Zeileis, A., & Grothendieck, G. (2005). Zoo: S3 Infrastructure for regular and irregular time series. Journal of Statistical Software, 14(6), 1-27. doi:https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v014.i06