Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39544358›Full record

ArticleOpen mind : discoveries in cognitive science2024

Number Attraction in Pronoun Production.

Margaret Kandel, Cassidy R Wyatt, Colin Phillips

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Margaret KandelDepartment of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-8385-9745
Cassidy R WyattFaculty of Linguistics, Philology, and Phonetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Colin PhillipsFaculty of Linguistics, Philology, and Phonetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pronoun production involves at least two processes: (i) deciding to refer to a referent with a pronoun instead of a full NP and (ii) determining the pronoun's form. In the present study, we assess whether the second of these processes occurs as a by-product of the first process-namely, does accessing the message-level representation of the referent provide access to the features required to determine pronoun form, meaning that pronouns should be robust to errors, or are pronoun features determined through an agreement operation with the antecedent, in which case they may be susceptible to agreement attraction, similar to subject-verb agreement. Prior lab experiments suggest that pronouns display number attraction at a similar rate to verbs. However, in contrast to verb attraction errors, there is no documentation of systematic pronoun attraction errors in corpora of natural speech. Our study builds upon prior lab work by eliciting pronoun sentences using a scene description paradigm that engages the pronominalization processes involved in natural speech. Across three experiments, we observed small but reliable number attraction effects for pronouns, suggesting that pronoun form is not always determined from the message-level representation of the referent. The elicited error rates were smaller than those previously observed for verbs in a similar scene-description paradigm; this smaller error rate helps to reconcile the apparent discrepancy between pronoun number attraction error rates observed in and outside the lab. The results suggest that pronoun form is determined (at least at times) through an agreement process referencing the features of the linguistic antecedent.

Indexed as

agreement attractionlanguage productionpronounsreference determination

Identifiers

PMID39544358
PMCPMC11563651

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.