A Working Memory Model of Sentence Processing As Binding Morphemes to Syntactic Positions

Overview

Journal Top Cogn Sci

Specialty Psychology

Date 2024 Dec 24

PMID 39718973

Authors

Maayan Keshev

Mandy Cartner

Aya Meltzer-Asscher

Brian Dillon

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

As they process complex linguistic input, language comprehenders must maintain a mapping between lexical items (e.g., morphemes) and their syntactic position in the sentence. We propose a model of how these morpheme-position bindings are encoded, maintained, and reaccessed in working memory, based on working memory models such as "serial-order-in-a-box" and its SOB-Complex Span version. Like those models, our model of linguistic working memory derives a range of attested memory interference effects from the process of binding items to positions in working memory. We present simulation results capturing similarity-based interference as well as item distortion effects. Our model provides a unified account of these two major classes of interference effects in sentence processing, attributing both types of effects to an associative memory architecture underpinning linguistic computation.

References

Laurinavichyute A, Jager L, Akinina Y, Ross J, Dragoy O . Retrieval and Encoding Interference: Cross-Linguistic Evidence from Anaphor Processing. Front Psychol. 2017; 8:965. PMC: 5465429. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00965. View

Smolensky P, Goldrick M, Mathis D . Optimization and quantization in gradient symbol systems: a framework for integrating the continuous and the discrete in cognition. Cogn Sci. 2013; 38(6):1102-38. DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12047. View

Bock K, Miller C . Broken agreement. Cogn Psychol. 1991; 23(1):45-93. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0285(91)90003-7. View

Farrell S, Lewandowsky S . An endogenous distributed model of ordering in serial recall. Psychon Bull Rev. 2002; 9(1):59-79. DOI: 10.3758/bf03196257. View

Hammerly C, Staub A, Dillon B . The grammaticality asymmetry in agreement attraction reflects response bias: Experimental and modeling evidence. Cogn Psychol. 2019; 110:70-104. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2019.01.001. View

Oberauer K, Lewandowsky S, Farrell S, Jarrold C, Greaves M . Modeling working memory: an interference model of complex span. Psychon Bull Rev. 2012; 19(5):779-819. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-012-0272-4. View

Treisman A . The binding problem. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1996; 6(2):171-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0959-4388(96)80070-5. View

Staub A . On the interpretation of the number attraction effect: Response time evidence. J Mem Lang. 2010; 60(2):308. PMC: 2683024. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2008.11.002. View

Oberauer K, Farrell S, Jarrold C, Lewandowsky S . What limits working memory capacity?. Psychol Bull. 2016; 142(7):758-99. DOI: 10.1037/bul0000046. View

10.

Van Dyke J . Interference effects from grammatically unavailable constituents during sentence processing. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007; 33(2):407-30. PMC: 2077343. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.2.407. View

11.

Lewis R, Vasishth S . An activation-based model of sentence processing as skilled memory retrieval. Cogn Sci. 2011; 29(3):375-419. DOI: 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_25. View

12.

MacDonald M, Pearlmutter N, Seidenberg M . The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution [corrected]. Psychol Rev. 1994; 101(4):676-703. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.101.4.676. View

13.

Gordon P, Hendrick R, Johnson M . Memory interference during language processing. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2001; 27(6):1411-23. DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.27.6.1411. View

14.

Smith G, Franck J, Tabor W . Encoding interference effects support self-organized sentence processing. Cogn Psychol. 2020; 124:101356. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2020.101356. View

15.

Patson N, Husband E . Misinterpretations in agreement and agreement attraction. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2015; 69(5):950-71. DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2014.992445. View

16.

Eberhard K, Cutting J, Bock K . Making syntax of sense: number agreement in sentence production. Psychol Rev. 2005; 112(3):531-59. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.112.3.531. View

17.

Futrell R, Gibson E, Levy R . Lossy-Context Surprisal: An Information-Theoretic Model of Memory Effects in Sentence Processing. Cogn Sci. 2020; 44(3):e12814. PMC: 7065005. DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12814. View

18.

Brehm L, Cho P, Smolensky P, Goldrick M . PIPS: A Parallel Planning Model of Sentence Production. Cogn Sci. 2022; 46(2):e13079. DOI: 10.1111/cogs.13079. View

19.

Tanner D, Nicol J, Brehm L . The time-course of feature interference in agreement comprehension: Multiple mechanisms and asymmetrical attraction. J Mem Lang. 2014; 76:195-215. PMC: 4170797. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2014.07.003. View

20.

Van Dyke J . Cue-dependent interference in comprehension. J Mem Lang. 2011; 65(3):247-263. PMC: 3171743. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2011.05.002. View