ReviewPsychonomic bulletin & review2025
Sentence processing by humans and machines: Large language models as a tool to better understand human reading.
Review in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Online measures of reading have been studied with the goal of understanding how humans process language incrementally as they progress through a text. A focus of this research has been on pinpointing how the context of a word influences its processing. Quantitatively measuring the effects of context has proven difficult but with advances in artificial intelligence, large language models (LLMs) are more capable of generating humanlike language, drawing solely on information about the probabilistic relationships of units of language (e.g., words) occurring together. LLMs can be used to estimate the probability of any word in the model's vocabulary occurring as the next word in a given context. These next-word probabilities can be used in the calculation of information theoretic metrics, such as entropy and surprisal, which can be assessed as measures of word-by-word processing load. This is done by analyzing whether entropy and surprisal derived from language models predict variance in online measures of human reading comprehension (e.g., eye-movement, self-paced reading, ERP data). The present review synthesizes empirical findings on this topic and evaluates their methodological and theoretical implications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40804188What 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.