The Time Course of the Influence of Implicit Causality Information: Focusing versus Integration Accounts

Andrew J. Stewart; Martin J. Pickering; Anthony J. Sanford

doi:10.1006/jmla.1999.2691

The Time Course of the Influence of Implicit Causality Information: Focusing versus Integration Accounts

Andrew J. Stewart, Martin J. Pickering, Anthony J. Sanford

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

We report four self-paced reading experiments that investigate the influence of implicit causality information on anaphor resolution. Specifically, we test whether the processor uses implicit causality information to focus an antecedent for an anaphor or to facilitate integration. Previous work has produced data supporting conflicting positions (Garnham, Traxler, Oakhill, & Gernsbacher, 1996; Greene & McKoon, 1995; McDonald & MacWhinney, 1995). A range of findings concerned with the processing of pronouns versus names, the resolution of ambiguous and unambiguous pronouns, and the effects of a depth-of-processing manipulation suggest that effects of implicit causality occur during integration and that there is no evidence for effects during focusing. © 2000 Academic Press.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	423-443
Number of pages	20
Journal	Journal of Memory and Language
Volume	42
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1999.2691
Publication status	Published - Apr 2000

Keywords

Implicit causality; pronoun; anaphor; verb; language comprehension

Access to Document

10.1006/jmla.1999.2691

Cite this

@article{f063b5022445481ba181b789e3a4b72b,

title = "The Time Course of the Influence of Implicit Causality Information: Focusing versus Integration Accounts",

abstract = "We report four self-paced reading experiments that investigate the influence of implicit causality information on anaphor resolution. Specifically, we test whether the processor uses implicit causality information to focus an antecedent for an anaphor or to facilitate integration. Previous work has produced data supporting conflicting positions (Garnham, Traxler, Oakhill, & Gernsbacher, 1996; Greene & McKoon, 1995; McDonald & MacWhinney, 1995). A range of findings concerned with the processing of pronouns versus names, the resolution of ambiguous and unambiguous pronouns, and the effects of a depth-of-processing manipulation suggest that effects of implicit causality occur during integration and that there is no evidence for effects during focusing. {\textcopyright} 2000 Academic Press.",

keywords = "Implicit causality; pronoun; anaphor; verb; language comprehension",

author = "Stewart, {Andrew J.} and Pickering, {Martin J.} and Sanford, {Anthony J.}",

year = "2000",

month = apr,

doi = "10.1006/jmla.1999.2691",

language = "English",

volume = "42",

pages = "423--443",

journal = "Journal of Memory and Language",

publisher = "Elsevier BV",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Time Course of the Influence of Implicit Causality Information: Focusing versus Integration Accounts

AU - Stewart, Andrew J.

AU - Pickering, Martin J.

AU - Sanford, Anthony J.

PY - 2000/4

Y1 - 2000/4

N2 - We report four self-paced reading experiments that investigate the influence of implicit causality information on anaphor resolution. Specifically, we test whether the processor uses implicit causality information to focus an antecedent for an anaphor or to facilitate integration. Previous work has produced data supporting conflicting positions (Garnham, Traxler, Oakhill, & Gernsbacher, 1996; Greene & McKoon, 1995; McDonald & MacWhinney, 1995). A range of findings concerned with the processing of pronouns versus names, the resolution of ambiguous and unambiguous pronouns, and the effects of a depth-of-processing manipulation suggest that effects of implicit causality occur during integration and that there is no evidence for effects during focusing. © 2000 Academic Press.

AB - We report four self-paced reading experiments that investigate the influence of implicit causality information on anaphor resolution. Specifically, we test whether the processor uses implicit causality information to focus an antecedent for an anaphor or to facilitate integration. Previous work has produced data supporting conflicting positions (Garnham, Traxler, Oakhill, & Gernsbacher, 1996; Greene & McKoon, 1995; McDonald & MacWhinney, 1995). A range of findings concerned with the processing of pronouns versus names, the resolution of ambiguous and unambiguous pronouns, and the effects of a depth-of-processing manipulation suggest that effects of implicit causality occur during integration and that there is no evidence for effects during focusing. © 2000 Academic Press.

KW - Implicit causality; pronoun; anaphor; verb; language comprehension

U2 - 10.1006/jmla.1999.2691

DO - 10.1006/jmla.1999.2691

M3 - Article

VL - 42

SP - 423

EP - 443

JO - Journal of Memory and Language

JF - Journal of Memory and Language

IS - 3

ER -

The Time Course of the Influence of Implicit Causality Information: Focusing versus Integration Accounts

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this