Poster Session 3

Friday, March 16, 12:30-2:30 pm

The activated set of focus alternatives facilitates the processing of ellipses ▪ Lena Benz, Shravan Vasishth, & Malte Zimmermann (University of Potsdam)
The role of speaker conventionality in preschoolers’ use of referential context: Evidence from eye movements ▪ Jared Berman, Julie Sedivy, Monica Hernandez, & Susan A. Graham (University of Calgary)
Friend or confederate: Conversation and a concurrent visuomotor task ▪ Tim Boiteau, Pat Malone, & Amit Almor (University of South Carolina)
I can tell from your voice: Adults and children use speaker identity to generate predictions during incremental sentence comprehension ▪ Arielle Borovsky & Sarah Creel (University of California, San Diego)
Antecedent topicality affects the processing of both NP anaphors and pronouns ▪ Evgenia Borshchevskaya & Amit Almor (University of South Carolina)
The mechanics of causal interpretation: Explaining implicit verb causality ▪ Oliver Bott (University of Tübingen) & Torgrim Solstad (Norwegian University of Science and Technology & University of Stuttgart)
The collective bias? Using eye movements to examine collective vs. distributive interpretations of plural sets ▪ Christine Boylan, Dimka Atanassov, Florian Schwarz, & John Trueswell (University of Pennsylvania)
Stress matters revisited: A boundary change experiment ▪ Mara Breen (Mount Holyoke College) & Charles Clifton, Jr. (University of Massachusetts, Amherst)
Preceding prosody influences metrical expectations during online sentence processing ▪ Meredith Brown, Anne Pier Salverda (University of Rochester), Laura C. Dilley (Michigan State University), & Michael K. Tanenhaus (University of Rochester)
Utterance planning and articulatory duration ▪ Alexandros Christodoulou & Jennifer E. Arnold (University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill)
Anticipation in real-world scenes: The role of visual context and visual memory ▪ Moreno I. Coco (University of Edinburgh), George L. Malcolm (University of Glasgow), & Frank Keller (University of Edinburgh)
Can syntax influence morphological complexity? Evidence from the gender congruency effect ▪ Clara Cohen & Susanne Gahl (University of California, Berkeley)
Referential forms in ADHD Children’s Narrative ▪ Maria Luiza Cunha Lima & Adriana Tenuta (Federal University of Minas Gerais)
Naturalness of lexical alternatives predicts time course of scalar implicatures ▪ Judith Degen & Michael K. Tanenhaus (University of Rochester)
Electrophysiological evidence of additional structure in intensional transitive constructions ▪ Francesca Delogu (Saarland University) & Francesco Vespignani (University of Trento)
Congruence effects in narrative time shifts ▪ Jeruen E. Dery & Jean-Pierre Koenig (University at Buffalo)
A computational model of discourse predictions in sentence processing ▪ Amit Dubey, Frank Keller, & Patrick Sturt (University of Edinburgh)
Subject-verb agreement in Persian ▪ Aazam Feizmohammadpour & Wind Cowles (University of Florida)
Task-constraints (but not semantic association) facilitate perspective use during discourse interpretation ▪ Heather Ferguson, Jumana Ahmad, Philip Ulrich, Markus Bindemann (University of Kent), & Ian Apperly (University of Birmingham)
Language experience accounts for individual differences in syntactic processing: Evidence from multi-level modeling ▪ Scott H. Fraundorf, Eun-Kyung Lee, & Duane G. Watson (University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign)
Case-neutralized NPs in Tagalog and the nature of heavy shift ▪ Michael Frazier (Northwestern University)
Error attraction and syntactic priming in subject-verb agreement production ▪ Whitney J. Fropf & Maryellen C. MacDonald (University of Wisconsin, Madison)
The rational integration of noise and prior semantic expectation: Evidence for a noisy-channel model of sentence interpretation ▪ Edward Gibson & Leon Bergen (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
The parsing of Spanish object clitics by 4-year-olds ▪ Theres Grüter (University of Hawai’i at Mānoa), Nereyda Hurtado, & Anne Fernald (Stanford University)
Grounding of anaphora in pointing gestures: Order of mention and prominence ▪ Barbara Hemforth (CNRS & University of Paris Diderot), Anne-Sophie Homassel (University of Paris Descartes), Daniel Müller Feldmeth, & Lars Konieczny (University of Freiburg)
Cumulative semantic interference persists even in highly constraining sentences ▪ Daniel Kleinman (University of California, San Diego), Elin Runnqvist (Universitat de Barcelona), Albert Costa (Universitat Pompeu Fabra), & Victor S. Ferreira (University of California, San Diego)
Evaluation of a Bayesian belief-updating model for the time course of linguistic adaptation ▪ Dave Kleinschmidt & T. Florian Jaeger (University of Rochester)
How does animacy affect word order in a VOS language ▪ Takuya Kubo (Hiroshima University), Hajime Ono (Kinki University), Mikihiro Tanaka (Showa University), Masatoshi Koizumi (Tohoku University), & Hiromu Sakai (Hiroshima University)
Online use of relational structural information in processing bound-variable pronouns ▪ Dave Kush, Jeff Lidz, & Colin Phillips (University of Maryland, College Park)
Dissociating influences on prosodic prominence: Repetition shortens words but predictability lengthens words in Korean ▪ Tuan Lam & Duane G. Watson (University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign)
Syntactic parsing reduced to its core ▪ David James Lobina & José Eugenio García-Albea (Universitat Rovira i Virgili)
Grammatical or notional number? 3-year-olds’ production and comprehension of verb agreement ▪ Cynthia Lukyanenko & Cynthia Fisher (University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign)
Info/information theory: Speakers actively choose shorter word in predictable contexts ▪ Kyle Mahowald & Evelina Fedorenko (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), Steven Piantadosi (University of Rochester), & Edward Gibson (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Cue-based retrieval interference during ellipsis: ERP evidence ▪ Andrea E. Martin, Mante S. Nieuwland, & Manuel Carreiras (Basque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language)
Syntactic probability influences duration ▪ Claire Moore-Cantwell (University of Massachusetts, Amherst)
Filling and revising a gap in Chinese: What does it tell us about semantic and syntactic processing? ▪ Shukhan Ng & Nicole Y. Y. Wicha (University of Texas, San Antonio)
Retrieval interference in the resolution of anaphoric PRO ▪ Dan Parker, Sol Lago, & Colin Phillips (University of Maryland, College Park)
The mental representation of plurals ▪ Nikole D. Patson (The Ohio State University), Tessa Warren, & Gerret George (University of Pittsburgh)
Experience-dependent predictive processes in learning novel verb bias: An ERP study ▪ Zhenghan Qi & Susan Garnsey (University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign)
Communication breakdown induces audience design strategies ▪ Jennifer M. Roche (University of Rochester), Rick Dale (University of California, Merced), & Roger Kreuz (University of Memphis)
An ERP study of semantic processing in Austrian sign language (ÖGS): The case of antonyms and classifiers ▪ Dietmar Roehm, Julia Krebs (University of Salzburg), & Ronnie Wilbur (Purdue University)
The effects of addressee attention on prosodic prominence ▪ Elise C. Rosa, Kayla Finch, Molly Bergeson, & Jennifer E. Arnold (University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill)
What can the brain tell us about some? ▪ Einat Shetreet (Havard University & Children’s Hospital Boston), Gennaro Chierchia (Havard University), & Nadine Gaab (Havard University & Children’s Hospital Boston)
Processing temporality: Syntactic position determines interpretation ▪ Britta Stolterfoht (University of Tübingen)
Mirror recursion learning in the Box Prediction artificial grammar paradigm ▪ Whitney Tabor, Pyeong Whan Cho, & Emily Szkudlarek (University of Connecticut & Haskins Laboratories)
Priming during real-time comprehension of code-switched utterances ▪ Malathi Thothathiri, Daniel Grodner, David Nahmias, & Mariela Puentes (Swarthmore College)
Contextual effects on figurative language processing: Activation vs. suppression ▪ John Tomlinson, Jr., Lewis Bott (Cardiff University), & Stavros Assimikapoulos (University of Malta)
Syntactic priming in noun vs. verb attachment ambiguities: Evidence from ERPs and eye-tracking ▪ Traxler, M. J., Boudewyn, M. A., Zirnstein, M., & Swaab, T. Y. (University of California, Davis)
Contrastive and non-contrastive Poset-licensing of German marked word order ▪ Thomas Weskott (University of Göttingen), Robin Hörnig (University of Tübingen), Gisbert Fanselow (University of Potsdam), & Reinhold Kliegl (University of Potsdam)
Is children’s reading “good-enough”? Linking real-time processing and comprehension in children’s reading ▪ Elizabeth Wonnacott (University of Warwick), Kate Nation, & Holly Joseph (University of Oxford)