Abstract
Using a forced-choice question-answering paradigm, K. Christianson, A. Hollingworth, J. F. Halliwell, and F. Ferreira (2001) showed that the original misinterpretation built during the analysis of a garden-path sentence lingers even after reanalysis has occurred. However, their methodology has been questioned (R. P. G. van Gompel, M. J. Pickering, J. Pearson, & G. Jacob, 2006). In this study, the authors report evidence for lingering misinterpretations using a paraphrasing methodology, which is less biased than previous methodologies. Using paraphrasing, they found that garden-path sentences are paraphrased according to a partially reanalyzed interpretation. This finding suggests that the arguments put forward by Christianson et al. are correct: Comprehenders' final interpretations of sentences are often incorrect and do not correspond to the initial input. These findings support the theory that comprehension can occur in a "good-enough" manner (F. Ferreira, V. Ferraro, & K. G. D. Bailey, 2002; F. Ferreira & N. Patson, 2007).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
