Data from eye-tracking corpora as evidence for theories of syntactic processing complexity
We evaluate the predictions of two theories of syntactic processing complexity, dependency locality theory (DLT) and surprisal, against the Dundee Corpus, which contains the eye-tracking record of 10 participants reading 51,000 words of newspaper text. Our results show that DLT integration cost is n...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Cognition 2008-11, Vol.109 (2), p.193-210 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 210 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 193 |
| container_title | Cognition |
| container_volume | 109 |
| creator | Demberg, Vera Keller, Frank |
| description | We evaluate the predictions of two theories of syntactic processing complexity, dependency locality theory (DLT) and surprisal, against the Dundee Corpus, which contains the eye-tracking record of 10 participants reading 51,000 words of newspaper text. Our results show that DLT integration cost is not a significant predictor of reading times for arbitrary words in the corpus. However, DLT successfully predicts reading times for nouns. We also find evidence for integration cost effects at auxiliaries, not predicted by DLT. For surprisal, we demonstrate that an unlexicalized formulation of surprisal can predict reading times for arbitrary words in the corpus. Comparing DLT integration cost and surprisal, we find that the two measures are uncorrelated, which suggests that a complete theory will need to incorporate both aspects of processing complexity. We conclude that eye-tracking corpora, which provide reading time data for naturally occurring, contextualized sentences, can complement experimental evidence as a basis for theories of processing complexity. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.008 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85687495</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ818398</ericid><els_id>S0010027708001741</els_id><sourcerecordid>85687495</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c628t-c104e582a737adb8dd0afe186dddf1010e254d84eba43a6f9278142146b159233</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUFv1DAQhS0EotvCP0DgC9wSxk4c28eqLQVUiQtcuFhee1K8ZOPF9lbsvyfRRstxT-8w35s3o0fIOwY1A9Z93NQuPo6hhDjWHEDVIOtJnpEVU7KppGrUc7ICYFABl_KCXOa8AYCWS_WSXDClG2iFWJGft7ZY2qe4pXjAqiTrfofxkbqYdjFZajPFp-BxdEj7mGj5hTEFzDT2NB_GYl0Jju5SdJjz0bjdDfg3lMMr8qK3Q8bXi16RH5_uvt98rh6-3X-5uX6oXMdVqRyDFoXiVjbS-rXyHmyPTHXe-356FpCL1qsW17ZtbNfr6QXWctZ2ayY0b5or8uG4d7rizx5zMduQHQ6DHTHus1GiU7LV4izYaQUgGnUWbCTjgvPzINMCtBZztDyCLsWcE_Zml8LWpoNhYOZGzcacGjVzowakmWRyvl0i9ust-v--pcIJeL8ANjs79MmOLuQTx0ELrXU3cW-OHKbgTuO7r4qpRs8518t4quopYDLZhbl2HxK6YnwMZ2_9ByIwzNQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>19509955</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Data from eye-tracking corpora as evidence for theories of syntactic processing complexity</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Demberg, Vera ; Keller, Frank</creator><creatorcontrib>Demberg, Vera ; Keller, Frank</creatorcontrib><description>We evaluate the predictions of two theories of syntactic processing complexity, dependency locality theory (DLT) and surprisal, against the Dundee Corpus, which contains the eye-tracking record of 10 participants reading 51,000 words of newspaper text. Our results show that DLT integration cost is not a significant predictor of reading times for arbitrary words in the corpus. However, DLT successfully predicts reading times for nouns. We also find evidence for integration cost effects at auxiliaries, not predicted by DLT. For surprisal, we demonstrate that an unlexicalized formulation of surprisal can predict reading times for arbitrary words in the corpus. Comparing DLT integration cost and surprisal, we find that the two measures are uncorrelated, which suggests that a complete theory will need to incorporate both aspects of processing complexity. We conclude that eye-tracking corpora, which provide reading time data for naturally occurring, contextualized sentences, can complement experimental evidence as a basis for theories of processing complexity.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0010-0277</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-7838</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.008</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18930455</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CGTNAU</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Adult ; Analysis of Variance ; Attention - physiology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cognition ; Comparative Analysis ; Corpus data ; Cues ; Data Interpretation, Statistical ; Data processing ; Dependency locality theory ; Discrimination (Psychology) - physiology ; Evaluation Methods ; Eye Movements ; Eye Movements - physiology ; Eye-tracking ; Female ; Fixation, Ocular ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Hand - physiology ; Human Body ; Humans ; Language ; Language Processing ; Male ; Movement - physiology ; Nouns ; Photic Stimulation ; Prediction ; Processing complexity ; Production and perception of written language ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Psychomotor Performance - physiology ; Reading Rate ; Sentences ; Sight ; Surprisal ; Syntax ; Visual Perception - physiology ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Cognition, 2008-11, Vol.109 (2), p.193-210</ispartof><rights>2008 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>2009 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c628t-c104e582a737adb8dd0afe186dddf1010e254d84eba43a6f9278142146b159233</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c628t-c104e582a737adb8dd0afe186dddf1010e254d84eba43a6f9278142146b159233</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.008$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3541,27915,27916,45986</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ818398$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=20959996$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18930455$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Demberg, Vera</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keller, Frank</creatorcontrib><title>Data from eye-tracking corpora as evidence for theories of syntactic processing complexity</title><title>Cognition</title><addtitle>Cognition</addtitle><description>We evaluate the predictions of two theories of syntactic processing complexity, dependency locality theory (DLT) and surprisal, against the Dundee Corpus, which contains the eye-tracking record of 10 participants reading 51,000 words of newspaper text. Our results show that DLT integration cost is not a significant predictor of reading times for arbitrary words in the corpus. However, DLT successfully predicts reading times for nouns. We also find evidence for integration cost effects at auxiliaries, not predicted by DLT. For surprisal, we demonstrate that an unlexicalized formulation of surprisal can predict reading times for arbitrary words in the corpus. Comparing DLT integration cost and surprisal, we find that the two measures are uncorrelated, which suggests that a complete theory will need to incorporate both aspects of processing complexity. We conclude that eye-tracking corpora, which provide reading time data for naturally occurring, contextualized sentences, can complement experimental evidence as a basis for theories of processing complexity.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Analysis of Variance</subject><subject>Attention - physiology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Corpus data</subject><subject>Cues</subject><subject>Data Interpretation, Statistical</subject><subject>Data processing</subject><subject>Dependency locality theory</subject><subject>Discrimination (Psychology) - physiology</subject><subject>Evaluation Methods</subject><subject>Eye Movements</subject><subject>Eye Movements - physiology</subject><subject>Eye-tracking</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fixation, Ocular</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Hand - physiology</subject><subject>Human Body</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Language Processing</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Movement - physiology</subject><subject>Nouns</subject><subject>Photic Stimulation</subject><subject>Prediction</subject><subject>Processing complexity</subject><subject>Production and perception of written language</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Psychomotor Performance - physiology</subject><subject>Reading Rate</subject><subject>Sentences</subject><subject>Sight</subject><subject>Surprisal</subject><subject>Syntax</subject><subject>Visual Perception - physiology</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0010-0277</issn><issn>1873-7838</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUFv1DAQhS0EotvCP0DgC9wSxk4c28eqLQVUiQtcuFhee1K8ZOPF9lbsvyfRRstxT-8w35s3o0fIOwY1A9Z93NQuPo6hhDjWHEDVIOtJnpEVU7KppGrUc7ICYFABl_KCXOa8AYCWS_WSXDClG2iFWJGft7ZY2qe4pXjAqiTrfofxkbqYdjFZajPFp-BxdEj7mGj5hTEFzDT2NB_GYl0Jju5SdJjz0bjdDfg3lMMr8qK3Q8bXi16RH5_uvt98rh6-3X-5uX6oXMdVqRyDFoXiVjbS-rXyHmyPTHXe-356FpCL1qsW17ZtbNfr6QXWctZ2ayY0b5or8uG4d7rizx5zMduQHQ6DHTHus1GiU7LV4izYaQUgGnUWbCTjgvPzINMCtBZztDyCLsWcE_Zml8LWpoNhYOZGzcacGjVzowakmWRyvl0i9ust-v--pcIJeL8ANjs79MmOLuQTx0ELrXU3cW-OHKbgTuO7r4qpRs8518t4quopYDLZhbl2HxK6YnwMZ2_9ByIwzNQ</recordid><startdate>20081101</startdate><enddate>20081101</enddate><creator>Demberg, Vera</creator><creator>Keller, Frank</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7T9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20081101</creationdate><title>Data from eye-tracking corpora as evidence for theories of syntactic processing complexity</title><author>Demberg, Vera ; Keller, Frank</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c628t-c104e582a737adb8dd0afe186dddf1010e254d84eba43a6f9278142146b159233</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Analysis of Variance</topic><topic>Attention - physiology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cognition</topic><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Corpus data</topic><topic>Cues</topic><topic>Data Interpretation, Statistical</topic><topic>Data processing</topic><topic>Dependency locality theory</topic><topic>Discrimination (Psychology) - physiology</topic><topic>Evaluation Methods</topic><topic>Eye Movements</topic><topic>Eye Movements - physiology</topic><topic>Eye-tracking</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fixation, Ocular</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Hand - physiology</topic><topic>Human Body</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Language Processing</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Movement - physiology</topic><topic>Nouns</topic><topic>Photic Stimulation</topic><topic>Prediction</topic><topic>Processing complexity</topic><topic>Production and perception of written language</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Psychomotor Performance - physiology</topic><topic>Reading Rate</topic><topic>Sentences</topic><topic>Sight</topic><topic>Surprisal</topic><topic>Syntax</topic><topic>Visual Perception - physiology</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Demberg, Vera</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keller, Frank</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>Cognition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Demberg, Vera</au><au>Keller, Frank</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ818398</ericid><atitle>Data from eye-tracking corpora as evidence for theories of syntactic processing complexity</atitle><jtitle>Cognition</jtitle><addtitle>Cognition</addtitle><date>2008-11-01</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>109</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>193</spage><epage>210</epage><pages>193-210</pages><issn>0010-0277</issn><eissn>1873-7838</eissn><coden>CGTNAU</coden><abstract>We evaluate the predictions of two theories of syntactic processing complexity, dependency locality theory (DLT) and surprisal, against the Dundee Corpus, which contains the eye-tracking record of 10 participants reading 51,000 words of newspaper text. Our results show that DLT integration cost is not a significant predictor of reading times for arbitrary words in the corpus. However, DLT successfully predicts reading times for nouns. We also find evidence for integration cost effects at auxiliaries, not predicted by DLT. For surprisal, we demonstrate that an unlexicalized formulation of surprisal can predict reading times for arbitrary words in the corpus. Comparing DLT integration cost and surprisal, we find that the two measures are uncorrelated, which suggests that a complete theory will need to incorporate both aspects of processing complexity. We conclude that eye-tracking corpora, which provide reading time data for naturally occurring, contextualized sentences, can complement experimental evidence as a basis for theories of processing complexity.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>18930455</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.008</doi><tpages>18</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0010-0277 |
| ispartof | Cognition, 2008-11, Vol.109 (2), p.193-210 |
| issn | 0010-0277 1873-7838 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85687495 |
| source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
| subjects | Adult Analysis of Variance Attention - physiology Biological and medical sciences Cognition Comparative Analysis Corpus data Cues Data Interpretation, Statistical Data processing Dependency locality theory Discrimination (Psychology) - physiology Evaluation Methods Eye Movements Eye Movements - physiology Eye-tracking Female Fixation, Ocular Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Hand - physiology Human Body Humans Language Language Processing Male Movement - physiology Nouns Photic Stimulation Prediction Processing complexity Production and perception of written language Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychology. Psychophysiology Psychomotor Performance - physiology Reading Rate Sentences Sight Surprisal Syntax Visual Perception - physiology Young Adult |
| title | Data from eye-tracking corpora as evidence for theories of syntactic processing complexity |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T05%3A50%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Data%20from%20eye-tracking%20corpora%20as%20evidence%20for%20theories%20of%20syntactic%20processing%20complexity&rft.jtitle=Cognition&rft.au=Demberg,%20Vera&rft.date=2008-11-01&rft.volume=109&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=193&rft.epage=210&rft.pages=193-210&rft.issn=0010-0277&rft.eissn=1873-7838&rft.coden=CGTNAU&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.008&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E85687495%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=19509955&rft_id=info:pmid/18930455&rft_ericid=EJ818398&rft_els_id=S0010027708001741&rfr_iscdi=true |