Working memory and sentence comprehension: Whose burden of proof?

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (1):113-114 (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Caplan & Waters argue that the processing resources used for sentence comprehension are not drawn from an undifferentiated verbal working memory resource. This commentary cites data from normal aging to support this position. Still lacking in theory development is a specification of the transient memory representations necessary for interpretive and post-interpretive operations.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,221

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Missing the syntactic piece.Angela D. Friederici & Ina Bornkessel - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (6):735-736.
Is it timing after all?Sonja A. Kotz & D. Yves von Cramon - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (1):103-104.
Verbal working memory and sentence comprehension.David Caplan & Gloria S. Waters - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (1):77-94.
Further fractionations of verbal working memory.Randi C. Martin - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (1):106-107.
Issues regarding general and domain-specific resources.David Caplan & Gloria Waters - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (1):114-122.
Problems with plausibility and alternatives to working memory.Neal J. Pearlmutter - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (1):109-109.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
16 (#771,273)

6 months
1 (#1,028,709)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references