13 found
Sort by:
  1. Ruth Filik & Anthony J. Sanford (2008). When is Cataphoric Reference Recognised? Cognition 107 (3):1112-1121.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Anthony J. Sanford (2008). Defining Embodiment in Understanding. In Manuel de Vega, Arthur Glenberg & Arthur Graesser (eds.), Symbols and Embodiment: Debates on Meaning and Cognition. Oup Oxford.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Asifa Majid, Anthony J. Sanford & Martin J. Pickering (2006). Covariation and Quantifier Polarity: What Determines Causal Attribution in Vignettes? Cognition 99 (1):35-51.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Cégep Montmorency, Jonas T. Kaplan, Eran Zaidel, Frank E. Pollick, M. Helena, Anthony J. Sanford, Hanako Yoshida, Linda B. Smith, F. -Xavier Alario & Alfonso Caramazza (2002). Sid Kouider and Emmanuel Dupoux (Ehess/Cnrs) a Functional Disconnection Between Spoken and Visual Word Recognition: Evidence From Unconscious Priming, B35–B49. Cognition 82:281-283.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Anthony J. Sanford (2002). Context, Attention and Depth of Processing During Interpretation. Mind and Language 17 (1&2):188–206.
  6. Anthony J. Sanford & Patrick Sturt (2002). Depth of Processing in Language Comprehension: Not Noticing the Evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 6 (9):382-386.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Frank E. Pollick, Helena M. Paterson, Armin Bruderlin & Anthony J. Sanford (2001). Perceiving Affect From Arm Movement. Cognition 82 (2):B51-B61.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Linda M. Moxey & Anthony J. Sanford (1998). Complement Set Reference and Quantifiers. In M. A. Gernsbacher & S. J. Derry (eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 1--4.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Linda M. Moxey & Anthony J. Sanford (1994). Editorial Introduction: Psychology and Semantics. Journal of Semantics 11 (3):149-152.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Anthony J. Sanford, Linda M. Moxey & Kevin Paterson (1994). Psychological Studies of Quantifiers. Journal of Semantics 11 (3):153-170.
    In this paper we present a summary review of recent psychological studies which make a contribution to an understanding of how quantifiers are used. Until relatively recently, the contribution which psychology has made has been somewhat restricted. For example, the approach which has enjoyed the greatest popularity in psychology is explaining quantifiers as expressions which have fuzzy or vague projections on to mental scales of amount. Following Moxey & Sanford (1993a), this view is questioned. Experimental work is summarized showing that (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Linda M. Moxey & Anthony J. Sanford (1993). Communicating Quantities: A Psychological Perspective (Essays in Cognitive Psychology). Psychology Press.
  12. Simon C. Garrod & Anthony J. Sanford (1988). Discourse Models as Interfaces Between Language and the Spatial World. Journal of Semantics 6 (1):147-160.
    This paper outlines an argument that the meaning of spatial terms depends critically upon our mental models of space. We argue that such models capture the functional geometry of spatial scenes to represent various control relations between the objects in the scene. The discussion centres around two analyses. First, an analysis of the spatial descriptions taken from task oriented dialogue, which seem to reflect a number of distinct mental models of the same visual scene, and secondly an analysis of simple (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Linda M. Moxey & Anthony J. Sanford (1986). Quantifiers and Focus. Journal of Semantics 5 (3):189-206.
    This paper concerns a neglected but potentially important aspect of natural language quantifiers. Certain quantifiers serve to identify various proportions of sets. Thus few, for example, identifies a smaller proportion of a set than many. However, different quantifiers may serve to identify similar proportions, yet produce somewhat different representations when they are used. The distinction between few and a few is considered in some detail, along with related expressions. It is claimed that these expressions serve to put into focus different (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation