ArticleCognitive science2022
Is the Mind Inherently Predicting? Exploring Forward and Backward Looking in Language Processing.
Article in Cognitive science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ultraslow brain dynamics as neurophysiological markers of information sampling during learning.iScience · 2026Article
- Executive resources shape the impact of language predictability across the adult lifespan.eLife · 2026Article
- Dynamics of learning new words from context.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2025Article
- Prediction in reading: A review of predictability effects, their theoretical implications, and beyond.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Review
- Uses of Linguistic Context in Speech Listening: Does Acquired Hearing Loss Lead to Reduced Engagement of Prediction?Ear and hearingReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prediction is one characteristic of the human mind. But what does it mean to say the mind is a "prediction machine" and inherently forward looking as is frequently claimed? In natural languages, many contexts are not easily predictable in a forward fashion. In English, for example, many frequent verbs do not carry unique meaning on their own but instead, rely on another word or words that follow them to become meaningful. Upon reading take a the processor often cannot easily predict walk as the next word. But the system can "look back" and integrate walk more easily when it follows take a (e.g., as opposed to *make|get|have a walk). In the present paper, we provide further evidence for the importance of both forward and backward-looking in language processing. In two self-paced reading tasks and an eye-tracking reading task, we found evidence that adult English native speakers' sensitivity to word forward and backward conditional probability significantly predicted reading times over and above psycholinguistic predictors of reading latencies. We conclude that both forward and backward-looking (prediction and integration) appear to be important characteristics of language processing. Our results thus suggest that it makes just as much sense to call the mind an "integration machine" which is inherently backward 'looking.'
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.