Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42057711›Full record

ArticleCognitive science2026

Cloze, Frequency, Surprisal, or Plausibility? A Comparative Analysis of Predictors for Local Ambiguity Resolution.

Markéta Ceháková, Jan Chromý

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Markéta CehákováInstitute of Czech Language and Theory of Communication, Faculty of Arts, Charles University.ORCID 0000-0002-3031-257X
Jan ChromýInstitute of Czech Language and Theory of Communication, Faculty of Arts, Charles University.ORCID 0000-0001-6646-8026

Funding

Faculty of Arts, Charles UniversityInstitute of Psychology of the Czech Academy of SciencesMinistry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study investigated the cognitive mechanisms underlying the processing of garden-path sentences by examining the influence of verb/structural bias, cloze probability, surprisal, and plausibility. Using self-paced reading with yes/no comprehension questions, we analyzed a structurally diverse set of 11 types of ambiguous and unambiguous sentences. Our results revealed that cloze probability was the most robust predictor of processing difficulty, significantly influencing both reaction times and response accuracy. Specifically, the likelihood of a misanalysis, as indexed by cloze scores, predicted the persistence of incorrect interpretations and reanalysis difficulty. In contrast, verb bias, surprisal, and plausibility exerted weaker or inconsistent effects, with only plausibility showing a limited interaction in the accuracy data. These findings suggest that comprehenders rely heavily on contextual cues when interpreting syntactically ambiguous input, and that reanalysis success depends not solely on structural preferences or lexical predictability but on the overall likelihood of the initial misanalysis and of the intended interpretation.

Indexed as

ComprehensionLanguageReadingHumansProbabilityReaction TimeSemanticsGarden‐path sentencesPlausibilityReanalysisStructural biasSurprisal

Identifiers

PMID42057711
PMCPMC13129637

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.