Skip to main content
Social Sci LibreTexts

11.8: References

  • Page ID
    92073
    • Wikipedia

    \( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

    \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

    ( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

    \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

    \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

    \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

    \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

    \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

    \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

    \(\newcommand{\avec}{\mathbf a}\) \(\newcommand{\bvec}{\mathbf b}\) \(\newcommand{\cvec}{\mathbf c}\) \(\newcommand{\dvec}{\mathbf d}\) \(\newcommand{\dtil}{\widetilde{\mathbf d}}\) \(\newcommand{\evec}{\mathbf e}\) \(\newcommand{\fvec}{\mathbf f}\) \(\newcommand{\nvec}{\mathbf n}\) \(\newcommand{\pvec}{\mathbf p}\) \(\newcommand{\qvec}{\mathbf q}\) \(\newcommand{\svec}{\mathbf s}\) \(\newcommand{\tvec}{\mathbf t}\) \(\newcommand{\uvec}{\mathbf u}\) \(\newcommand{\vvec}{\mathbf v}\) \(\newcommand{\wvec}{\mathbf w}\) \(\newcommand{\xvec}{\mathbf x}\) \(\newcommand{\yvec}{\mathbf y}\) \(\newcommand{\zvec}{\mathbf z}\) \(\newcommand{\rvec}{\mathbf r}\) \(\newcommand{\mvec}{\mathbf m}\) \(\newcommand{\zerovec}{\mathbf 0}\) \(\newcommand{\onevec}{\mathbf 1}\) \(\newcommand{\real}{\mathbb R}\) \(\newcommand{\twovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\ctwovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\threevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cthreevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\mattwo}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{rr}#1 \amp #2 \\ #3 \amp #4 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\laspan}[1]{\text{Span}\{#1\}}\) \(\newcommand{\bcal}{\cal B}\) \(\newcommand{\ccal}{\cal C}\) \(\newcommand{\scal}{\cal S}\) \(\newcommand{\wcal}{\cal W}\) \(\newcommand{\ecal}{\cal E}\) \(\newcommand{\coords}[2]{\left\{#1\right\}_{#2}}\) \(\newcommand{\gray}[1]{\color{gray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\lgray}[1]{\color{lightgray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\rank}{\operatorname{rank}}\) \(\newcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\col}{\text{Col}}\) \(\renewcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\nul}{\text{Nul}}\) \(\newcommand{\var}{\text{Var}}\) \(\newcommand{\corr}{\text{corr}}\) \(\newcommand{\len}[1]{\left|#1\right|}\) \(\newcommand{\bbar}{\overline{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bhat}{\widehat{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bperp}{\bvec^\perp}\) \(\newcommand{\xhat}{\widehat{\xvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\vhat}{\widehat{\vvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\uhat}{\widehat{\uvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\what}{\widehat{\wvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\Sighat}{\widehat{\Sigma}}\) \(\newcommand{\lt}{<}\) \(\newcommand{\gt}{>}\) \(\newcommand{\amp}{&}\) \(\definecolor{fillinmathshade}{gray}{0.9}\)

    Ashwin Ram, et al. (1999) Understanding Language Understanding - chapter 5

    Baggett, P. (1979). Structurally equivalent stories in movie and text and the effect of the medium on recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 333-356.

    Bertram F. Malle, et al. (2001) Intentions and Intentionality - chapter 9

    Boroditsky, L. (2000). Metaphoric Structuring: Understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition, 75, 1-28.

    Carlson-Radvansky, L. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1996). The influence of functional relations on spatial term selection. Psychological Science, 7, 56-60.

    Carreiras, M., et al. (1996). The use of stereotypical gender information in constructing a mental model: Evidence from English and Spanish. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 639-663.

    Dahan, D., & Tanenhaus, M.K. (2002). Activation of conceptual representations during spoken word recognition. Abstracts of the Psychonomic Society, 7, 14.

    Ericsson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory. Psychological Review, 102, 211-245.

    Farah, M. J., & McClelland, J. L. (1991). A computational model of semantic memory impairment: modality specificity and emergent category specificity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 210, 339-357.

    Fincher-Kiefer (2001). Perceptual components of situation models. Memory & Cognition, 29 , 336-343.

    Fincher-Kiefer, R., et al. (1988). On the role of prior knowledge and task demands in the processing of text. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 416-428.

    Garrod, S. C., & Sanford, A. J. (1989). Discourse models as interfaces between language and the spatial world. Journal of Semantics, 6, 147-160.

    Gernsbacher, M.A. (1990), Language comprehension as structure building. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 558-565.

    Glenberg, A. M., et al. (1987) Mental models contribute to foregrounding during text comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 26:69-83.

    Givon, T. (1992), The grammar of referential coherence as mental processing instructions, Linguistics, 30, 5-55.

    Goldman, S.R., et al. (1996). Extending capacityconstrained construction integration: Towards "smarter" and flexible models of text comprehension. Models of understanding text (pp. 73–113).

    Goldstein, E.Bruce, Cognitive Psychology, Connecting Mind, Research, and Everyday Experience (2005) - ISBN 0-534-57732-6.

    Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994), Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371-395.

    Holland, John H. , et al. (1986) Induction.

    Horton, W.S., Rapp, D.N. (in press). Occlusion and the Accessibility of Information in Narrative Comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

    Isenberg, N., et al. (1999). Linguistic threat activates the human amygdala. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 96, 10456-10459.

    Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    John R. Koza, et al. (1996) Genetic Programming

    Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity hypothesis of comprehension: Individual differences ih working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122-149.

    Kaup, B., & Zwaan, R.A. (in press). Effects of negation and situational presence on the accessibility of text information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition.

    Keefe, D. E., & McDaniel, M. A. (1993). The time course and durability of predictive inferences. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 446-463.

    Kintsch, W. (1988), The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model, Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.

    Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978), Toward a model of text comprehension and production, Psychological Review, 85, 363-394.

    Kintsch, W. (1992), How readers construct situation models for stories: The role of syntactic cues and causal inferences. In A. E Healy, S. M. Kosslyn, & R. M. Shiffrin (Eds.), From learning processes to cognitive processes. Essays in honor of William K. Estes (Vol. 2, pp. 261 – 278).

    Klatzky, R.L., et al. (1989). Can you squeeze a tomato? The role of motor representations in semantic sensibility judgments. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 56-77.

    Martin, A., & Chao, L. L. (2001). Semantic memory and the brain: structure and processes. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 11, 194-201.

    McRae, K., et al. (1997). On the nature and scope of featural representations of word meaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 99-130.

    Mehler, Jacques, & Franck, Susana. (1995) Cognition on Cognition - chapter 9

    Miceli, G., et al. (2001). The dissociation of color from form and function knowledge. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 662-667.

    Morrow, D., et al. (1987). Accessibility and situation models in narrative comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 165-187.

    Pulvermüller, F. (1999). Words in the brain's language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 253-270.

    Pulvermüller, F. (2002). A brain perspective on language mechanisms: from discrete neuronal ensembles to serial order. Progress in Neurobiology, 67, 85–111.

    Radvansky, G. A., & Zwaan, R.A. (1998). Situation models.

    Schmalhofer, F., MacDaniel, D. Keefe (2002). A Unified Model for Predictive and Bridging Inferences

    Schneider, W., & Körkel, J. (1989). The knowledge base and text recall: Evidence from a short-term longitudinal study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 14, 382-393.

    Singer, M., et al. (1992). Validation of causal bridging inferences. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 507-524.

    Spivey, M.J., et al. (2000). Eye movements during comprehension of spoken scene descriptions. Proceedings of the Twenty-second Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 487–492).

    Stanfield, R.A. & Zwaan, R.A. (2001). The effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition. Psychological Science, 12, 153-156.

    Talmy, Leonard,(2000) Toward a Cognitive Semantics - Vol. 1 - chapter1

    van den Broek, P., et al. (1996). A "landscape" view of reading: Fluctuating patterns of activation and the construction of a memory representation. In B. K. Britton & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Models of understanding text (pp. 165–187).

    Van Dijk, T. A., and W. Kintsch. (1983).Strategies of discourse comprehension.

    Yekovich, F.R., et al. (1990). The influence of domain knowledge on inferencing in low-aptitude individuals. In A. C. Graesser & G. H. Bower (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 25, pp. 175–196). New York: Academic Press.

    Zwaan, R.A. (1996). Processing narrative time shifts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 22, 1196-1207

    Zwaan, R.A. (2003), The Immersed Experiencer: Toward an embodied theory of language comprehension.B.H. Ross (Ed.) The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 44. New York: Academic Press.

    Zwaan, R. A., et al. (1998). Situation-model construction during translation. Manuscript in preparation, Florida State University.

    Zwaan, R. A., et al. ( 1995 ). The construction of situation models in narrative comprehension: An event-indexing model. Psychological Science, 6, 292-297.

    Zwaan, R. A., et al. (1995). Dimensions of situation model construction in narrative comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology." Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 386-397.

    Zwaan, R. A., Radvansky (1998), Situation Models in Language Comprehension and Memory. in Psychological Bulletin, Vol.123,No2 p. 162-185.

    Zwaan, R.A., et al. (2002). Do language comprehenders routinely represent the shapes of objects? Psychological Science, 13, 168-171.

    Zwaan, R.A., & Yaxley, R.H. (a). Spatial iconicity affects semantic-relatedness judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

    Zwaan, R.A., & Yaxley, R.H. (b). Hemispheric differences in semantic-relatedness judgments. Cognition.


    This page titled 11.8: References is shared under a CC BY-SA 3.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Wikipedia via source content that was edited to the style and standards of the LibreTexts platform.