Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Predictive analysis vs. segmentational analysis in sentence perception.

C P Whaley

    Journal of Psycholinguistic Research
    |November 1, 1979
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same journal

    Cognitive Individual Differences in Multilingualism: Language Aptitude and Working Memory in L3 Learners.

    Journal of psycholinguistic research·2026
    Same journal

    Grasp Motor Representations Facilitate Conceptual Preparation in Speech Production.

    Journal of psycholinguistic research·2026
    Same journal

    The Lexical Tone Partially Depends on Segments: Evidence from Visual-World Eye Tracking.

    Journal of psycholinguistic research·2026
    Same journal

    Unearthing Perfectionism and L2 Speaking Performance among Iranian EFL Learners: The Moderating Role of Cultural Collectivism.

    Journal of psycholinguistic research·2026
    Same journal

    Child Bilingual Acquisition of Spanish Dative (Non-)clitic Doubling Structures: A Case Study Approach to Home and Community Input Conditions.

    Journal of psycholinguistic research·2026
    Same journal

    Using Eye Tracking to Examine Effects of Overt Localization on Referential Processing in German Sign Language Sentence Processing.

    Journal of psycholinguistic research·2026
    See all related articles

    Sentence perception models were tested using nonword detection latency. Predictive analysis (PA) was supported over segmentational analysis (SA), especially with concurrent tasks, revealing how listeners process language.

    Area of Science:

    • Cognitive Psychology
    • Psycholinguistics
    • Computational Linguistics

    Background:

    • Understanding sentence perception is key to psycholinguistics.
    • Two models, predictive analysis (PA) and segmentational analysis (SA), explain how listeners process grammatical structures.
    • PA processes sequentially, while SA uses clauselike units.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To experimentally evaluate predictive analysis (PA) and segmentational analysis (SA) models of sentence perception.
    • To investigate the role of concurrent tasks in sentence processing.
    • To determine the robustness of findings across different experimental conditions.

    Main Methods:

    • Nonword detection (NWD) latency procedure was used across three experiments.
    • Experiment I: NWD without a concurrent task.

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Experiments II & III: NWD with concurrent comprehension and recall tasks, respectively. A nongrammatical condition was included in Experiment III.

    • Main Results:

    • Nonword detection latencies generally supported the predictive analysis (PA) model.
    • The PA model's support was particularly evident when a concurrent task (comprehension or recall) was employed.
    • Findings were not artifactual, confirmed by a nongrammatical condition.

    Conclusions:

    • The results indicate that listeners engage in predictive, sequential processing during sentence perception.
    • Concurrent tasks enhance the evidence for predictive analysis in sentence processing.
    • The study provides empirical support for predictive models of human language comprehension.