ArticleCognitive processing2023
Predictive structure building in language comprehension: a large sample study on incremental licensing and parallelism.
Article in Cognitive processing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dependency-Distance Effects Are Not Evidence Against Grammatical Theories With Empty Categories: When Psycholinguistic Data Are Not Diagnostic.Cognitive science · 2026Article
- Reassessing cumulative self-paced reading (SPR): Testing three variants shows cumulative SPR can be more useful than standard non-cumulative SPR for sentence-processing research, depending on presentation format.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Active dependency formation and ambiguity resolution in real-time sentence processing.Memory & cognition · 2026Article
- Real-time resolution of VP ellipsis ambiguity and processing depth.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Competing Biases in Real-Time Sentence Processing.Journal of cognition · 2026Article
- Memory Retrieval in Online Sentence Parsing: Empirical Evidence, Computational Modelling, and Simulations.Computational brain & behavior · 2024Article
- Online revision process in clause-boundary garden-path sentences.Memory & cognition · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
In online language comprehension, the parser incrementally builds hierarchical syntactic structures. The predictive nature of this structure-building process has been the subject of extensive debate. A previous study observed that when a wh-phrase indicates parallelism between the upcoming wh-clause and a preceding clause (e.g., John told some stories, but we couldn't remember which stories…), the parser predictively constructs the wh-clause. This observation demonstrates predictive structure building. However, the study also suggests that the parser does not make a prediction when the wh-phrase indicates that parallelism does not hold (e.g., John told some stories … with which stories…), a potential limit to the prediction of syntactic structures. Crucially, these findings are controversial because the study did not observe processing difficulty when disambiguating input indicated that the predicted continuation was inconsistent with the globally grammatical structure (garden-path effects). The controversial results may be due to a lack of statistical power. Therefore, the present study conducted a large-scale replication study (324 participants and 24 sets of materials). The results revealed that the parser predicts the clausal structure, irrespective of the type of wh-phrase. There was also evidence of garden-path effects, supporting the finding that the parser makes a prediction. These observations suggest that the prediction algorithm inherent in the human parser is more powerful than assumed by the previous study and that the parser attempts to construct globally grammatical structures during revision.
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.