These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34170031)

  • 1. Single-Stage Prediction Models Do Not Explain the Magnitude of Syntactic Disambiguation Difficulty.
    van Schijndel M; Linzen T
    Cogn Sci; 2021 Jun; 45(6):e12988. PubMed ID: 34170031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reanalysis and semantic persistence in native and non-native garden-path recovery.
    Jacob G; Felser C
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2016; 69(5):907-25. PubMed ID: 25397360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Is children's reading "good enough"? Links between online processing and comprehension as children read syntactically ambiguous sentences.
    Wonnacott E; Joseph HS; Adelman JS; Nation K
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2016; 69(5):855-79. PubMed ID: 25774745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Rapid syntactic adaptation in self-paced reading: Detectable, but only with many participants.
    Prasad G; Linzen T
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2021 Jul; 47(7):1156-1172. PubMed ID: 34472920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effects of Surprisal and Locality on Danish Sentence Processing: An Eye-Tracking Investigation.
    Balling LW; Kizach J
    J Psycholinguist Res; 2017 Oct; 46(5):1119-1136. PubMed ID: 28332141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Estimating the True Cost of Garden Pathing: A Computational Model of Latent Cognitive Processes.
    Paape D; Vasishth S
    Cogn Sci; 2022 Aug; 46(8):e13186. PubMed ID: 35986666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Thematic roles assigned along the garden path linger.
    Christianson K; Hollingworth A; Halliwell JF; Ferreira F
    Cogn Psychol; 2001 Jun; 42(4):368-407. PubMed ID: 11368528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Is human sentence parsing serial or parallel? Evidence from event-related brain potentials.
    Hopf JM; Bader M; Meng M; Bayer J
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2003 Jan; 15(2):165-77. PubMed ID: 12429368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: evidence from eye movements and word-by-word self-paced reading.
    Ferreira F; Henderson JM
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1990 Jul; 16(4):555-68. PubMed ID: 2142952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Causality and signalling of garden-path sentences.
    Wang D; Sadrzadeh M
    Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci; 2024 Mar; 382(2268):20230013. PubMed ID: 38281713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of executive attention on sentence processing in aphasia.
    Peristeri E; Tsimpli IM; Dardiotis E; Tsapkini K
    Aphasiology; 2020; 34(8):943-969. PubMed ID: 32952261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Lexical Predictability During Natural Reading: Effects of Surprisal and Entropy Reduction.
    Lowder MW; Choi W; Ferreira F; Henderson JM
    Cogn Sci; 2018 Jun; 42 Suppl 4(Suppl 4):1166-1183. PubMed ID: 29442360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. When readers fail to form a coherent representation of garden-path sentences.
    Chromý J
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2022 Jan; 75(1):169-190. PubMed ID: 34289762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Prediction at the intersection of sentence context and word form: Evidence from eye-movements and self-paced reading.
    Amenta S; Hasenäcker J; Crepaldi D; Marelli M
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2023 Jun; 30(3):1081-1092. PubMed ID: 36510092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Semantic re-interpretation and garden path recovery.
    Sturt P
    Cognition; 2007 Nov; 105(2):477-88. PubMed ID: 17178115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Expectation-based syntactic comprehension.
    Levy R
    Cognition; 2008 Mar; 106(3):1126-77. PubMed ID: 17662975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of Structural Parsers and Neural Language Models as Surprisal Estimators.
    Oh BD; Clark C; Schuler W
    Front Artif Intell; 2022; 5():777963. PubMed ID: 35310956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Working memory constraints on syntactic ambiguity resolution as revealed by electrical brain responses.
    Friederici AD; Steinhauer K; Mecklinger A; Meyer M
    Biol Psychol; 1998 Mar; 47(3):193-221. PubMed ID: 9564450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Language structure in the brain: A fixation-related fMRI study of syntactic surprisal in reading.
    Henderson JM; Choi W; Lowder MW; Ferreira F
    Neuroimage; 2016 May; 132():293-300. PubMed ID: 26908322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Dependency Resolution Difficulty Increases with Distance in Persian Separable Complex Predicates: Evidence for Expectation and Memory-Based Accounts.
    Safavi MS; Husain S; Vasishth S
    Front Psychol; 2016; 7():403. PubMed ID: 27064660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.