Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Lena A. Jäger is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Lena A. Jäger.


Frontiers in Psychology | 2015

Retrieval interference in reflexive processing: experimental evidence from Mandarin, and computational modeling

Lena A. Jäger; Felix Engelmann; Shravan Vasishth

We conducted two eye-tracking experiments investigating the processing of the Mandarin reflexive ziji in order to tease apart structurally constrained accounts from standard cue-based accounts of memory retrieval. In both experiments, we tested whether structurally inaccessible distractors that fulfill the animacy requirement of ziji influence processing times at the reflexive. In Experiment 1, we manipulated animacy of the antecedent and a structurally inaccessible distractor intervening between the antecedent and the reflexive. In conditions where the accessible antecedent mismatched the animacy cue, we found inhibitory interference whereas in antecedent-match conditions, no effect of the distractor was observed. In Experiment 2, we tested only antecedent-match configurations and manipulated locality of the reflexive-antecedent binding (Mandarin allows non-local binding). Participants were asked to hold three distractors (animate vs. inanimate nouns) in memory while reading the target sentence. We found slower reading times when animate distractors were held in memory (inhibitory interference). Moreover, we replicated the locality effect reported in previous studies. These results are incompatible with structure-based accounts. However, the cue-based ACT-R model of Lewis and Vasishth (2005) cannot explain the observed pattern either. We therefore extend the original ACT-R model and show how this model not only explains the data presented in this article, but is also able to account for previously unexplained patterns in the literature on reflexive processing.


Frontiers in Psychology | 2015

Teasing apart retrieval and encoding interference in the processing of anaphors

Lena A. Jäger; Lena Benz; Jens Roeser; Brian Dillon; Shravan Vasishth

Two classes of account have been proposed to explain the memory processes subserving the processing of reflexive-antecedent dependencies. Structure-based accounts assume that the retrieval of the antecedent is guided by syntactic tree-configurational information without considering other kinds of information such as gender marking in the case of English reflexives. By contrast, unconstrained cue-based retrieval assumes that all available information is used for retrieving the antecedent. Similarity-based interference effects from structurally illicit distractors which match a non-structural retrieval cue have been interpreted as evidence favoring the unconstrained cue-based retrieval account since cue-based retrieval interference from structurally illicit distractors is incompatible with the structure-based account. However, it has been argued that the observed effects do not necessarily reflect interference occurring at the moment of retrieval but might equally well be accounted for by interference occurring already at the stage of encoding or maintaining the antecedent in memory, in which case they cannot be taken as evidence against the structure-based account. We present three experiments (self-paced reading and eye-tracking) on German reflexives and Swedish reflexive and pronominal possessives in which we pit the predictions of encoding interference and cue-based retrieval interference against each other. We could not find any indication that encoding interference affects the processing ease of the reflexive-antecedent dependency formation. Thus, there is no evidence that encoding interference might be the explanation for the interference effects observed in previous work. We therefore conclude that invoking encoding interference may not be a plausible way to reconcile interference effects with a structure-based account of reflexive processing.


Language, cognition and neuroscience | 2018

Overt language production of German past participles: investigating (ir-)regularity

Tina Marusch; Lena A. Jäger; Leander Neiß; Frank Burchert; Lyndsey Nickels

ABSTRACT We report two experiments and Bayesian modelling of the data collected. In both experiments, participants performed a long-lag primed picture naming task. Black-and-white line drawings were used as targets, which were overtly named by the participants. Their naming latencies were measured. In both experiments, primes consisted of past participle verbs (er tanzt/er hat getanzt “he dances/he has danced”) and the relationship between primes and targets was either morphological or unrelated. Experiment 1 additionally had phonologically and semantically related prime-target pairs as well as present tense primes. Both in Experiment 1 and 2, participants showed significantly faster naming latencies for morphologically related targets relative to the unrelated verb primes. In Experiment 1, no priming effects were observed in phonologically and semantically related control conditions. In addition, the production latencies were not influenced by verb type.


Archive | 2017

The effect of prominence and cue association in retrieval processes: A computational account

Felix Engelmann; Lena A. Jäger; Shravan Vasishth

We present a comprehensive empirical evaluation of the ACT-R–based model of sentence processing developed by Lewis and Vasishth (2005) (LV05). The predictions of the model are compared with the results of a recent meta-analysis of published reading studies on retrieval interference in reflexive-/reciprocal-antecedent and subject–verb dependencies (J€ager, Engelmann, & Vasishth, 2017). The comparison shows that the model has only partial success in explaining the data; and we propose that its prediction space is restricted by oversimplifying assumptions. We then implement a revised model that takes into account differences between individual experimental designs in terms of the prominence of the target and the distractor in memoryand context-dependent cue-feature associations. The predictions of the original and the revised model are quantitatively compared with the results of the meta-analysis. Our simulations show that, compared to the original LV05 model, the revised model accounts for the data better. The results suggest that effects of prominence and variable cue-feature associations need to be considered in the interpretation of existing empirical results and in the design and planning of future experiments. With regard to retrieval interference in sentence processing and to the broader field of psycholinguistic studies, we conclude that well-specified models in tandem with high-powered experiments are needed in order to uncover the underlying cognitive processes.


Frontiers in Psychology | 2017

Retrieval and Encoding Interference: Cross-Linguistic Evidence from Anaphor Processing

Anna Laurinavichyute; Lena A. Jäger; Yulia Akinina; Jennifer Roß; Olga Dragoy

The main goal of this paper was to disentangle encoding and retrieval interference effects in anaphor processing and thus to evaluate the hypothesis predicting that structurally inaccessible nouns (distractors) are not considered to be potential anaphor antecedents during language processing (Nicol and Swinney, 1989). Three self-paced reading experiments were conducted: one in German, comparing gender-unmarked reflexives and gender-marked pronouns, and two in Russian, comparing gender-marked and -unmarked reflexives. In the German experiment, no interference effects were found. In the first experiment in Russian, an unexpected reading times pattern emerged: in the condition where the distractor matched the gender of the reflexives antecedent, reading of the gender-unmarked, but not the gender-marked reflexives was slowed down. The same reading times pattern was replicated in a second experiment in Russian where the order of the reflexive and the main verb was inverted. We conclude that the results of the two experiments in Russian are inconsistent with the retrieval interference account, but can be explained by encoding interference and additional semantic processing efforts associated with the processing of gender-marked reflexives. In sum, we found no evidence that would allow us to reject the syntax as an early filer account (Nicol and Swinney, 1989).


Journal of Memory and Language | 2017

Similarity-based interference in sentence comprehension: Literature review and Bayesian meta-analysis

Lena A. Jäger; Felix Engelmann; Shravan Vasishth


Journal of Memory and Language | 2015

The subject-relative advantage in Chinese: Evidence for expectation-based processing

Lena A. Jäger; Zhong Chen; Qiang Li; Chien-Jer Charles Lin; Shravan Vasishth


The Mind Research Repository | 2012

How structure-sensitive is the parser? Evidence from Mandarin Chinese

Zhong Chen; Lena A. Jäger; Shravan Vasishth


Archive | 2015

The determinants of retrieval interference in dependency resolution: Review and computational modeling

Felix Engelmann; Lena A. Jäger; Shravan Vasishth


Archive | 2014

Inhibitory interference in reflexives: Evidence for cue confusability

Lena A. Jäger; Felix Engelmann; Shravan Vasishth

Collaboration


Dive into the Lena A. Jäger's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jens Roeser

Nottingham Trent University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Lena Benz

University of Potsdam

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge