9 found
Order:
  1. Are Linguists Better Subjects?Jennifer Culbertson & Steven Gross - 2009 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (4):721-736.
    Who are the best subjects for judgment tasks intended to test grammatical hypotheses? Michael Devitt ( [2006a] , [2006b] ) argues, on the basis of a hypothesis concerning the psychology of such judgments, that linguists themselves are. We present empirical evidence suggesting that the relevant divide is not between linguists and non-linguists, but between subjects with and without minimally sufficient task-specific knowledge. In particular, we show that subjects with at least some minimal exposure to or knowledge of such tasks tend (...)
    Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   33 citations  
  2.  19
    Learning Biases Predict a Word Order Universal.Jennifer Culbertson, Paul Smolensky & Géraldine Legendre - 2012 - Cognition 122 (3):306-329.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   26 citations  
  3. Revisited Linguistic Intuitions.Jennifer Culbertson & Steven Gross - 2011 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 62 (3):639 - 656.
    Michael Devitt ([2006a], [2006b]) argues that, insofar as linguists possess better theories about language than non-linguists, their linguistic intuitions are more reliable. (Culbertson and Gross [2009]) presented empirical evidence contrary to this claim. Devitt ([2010]) replies that, in part because we overemphasize the distinction between acceptability and grammaticality, we misunderstand linguists' claims, fall into inconsistency, and fail to see how our empirical results can be squared with his position. We reply in this note. Inter alia we argue that Devitt's focus (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  4.  20
    Harmonic Biases in Child Learners: In Support of Language Universals.Jennifer Culbertson & Elissa L. Newport - 2015 - Cognition 139:71-82.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  5. Cognitive Biases, Linguistic Universals, and Constraint‐Based Grammar Learning.Jennifer Culbertson, Paul Smolensky & Colin Wilson - 2013 - Topics in Cognitive Science 5 (3):392-424.
    According to classical arguments, language learning is both facilitated and constrained by cognitive biases. These biases are reflected in linguistic typology—the distribution of linguistic patterns across the world's languages—and can be probed with artificial grammar experiments on child and adult learners. Beginning with a widely successful approach to typology (Optimality Theory), and adapting techniques from computational approaches to statistical learning, we develop a Bayesian model of cognitive biases and show that it accounts for the detailed pattern of results of artificial (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  6.  42
    A Bayesian Model of Biases in Artificial Language Learning: The Case of a Word‐Order Universal.Jennifer Culbertson & Paul Smolensky - 2012 - Cognitive Science 36 (8):1468-1498.
  7.  5
    Simplicity and Specificity in Language: Domain-General Biases Have Domain-Specific Effects.Jennifer Culbertson & Simon Kirby - 2015 - Frontiers in Psychology 6.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  8.  15
    Zipf’s Law of Abbreviation and the Principle of Least Effort: Language Users Optimise a Miniature Lexicon for Efficient Communication.Jasmeen Kanwal, Kenny Smith, Jennifer Culbertson & Simon Kirby - 2017 - Cognition 165:45-52.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  9.  3
    Evolving Artificial Sign Languages in the Lab: From Improvised Gesture to Systematic Sign.Yasamin Motamedi, Marieke Schouwstra, Kenny Smith, Jennifer Culbertson & Simon Kirby - 2019 - Cognition 192:103964.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark