| 1 |
The empirical status of data in syntax: A reply to gibson and fedorenko
|
|
|
|
In: http://www.socsci.uci.edu/%7Ejsprouse/papers/sprouse.almeida.LCP.pdf (2013)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 2 |
A test of the cognitive assumptions of magnitude estimation: commutativity does not hold for acceptability judgments
|
|
|
|
In: http://www.socsci.uci.edu/~jsprouse/papers/sprouse.2011.language.pdf (2011)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 3 |
A validation of Amazon Mechanical Turk for the collection of acceptability judgments in linguistic theory
|
|
|
|
In: ftp://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/f7/30/Behav_Res_Methods_2010_Nov_25_43(1)_155-167.tar.gz (2011)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 4 |
Assessing the reliability of journal data in syntax: Linguistic Inquiry 2001-2010
|
|
|
|
In: http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/cschutze/assessing.pdf (2011)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 5 |
Magnitude Estimation and the Non-Linearity of Acceptability Judgments
|
|
|
|
In: http://www.lingref.com/cpp/wccfl/27/paper1855.pdf (2008)
|
|
Abstract:
The term experimental syntax – the use of psycholinguistic methodologies for the collection of acceptability judgments – can cover any number of designs, tasks, and statistical analyses (Cowart 1997, Schütze 1996). Over the past decade, one task in particular, the magnitude estimation task, has received significant attention for its alleged ability to provide more accurate data, almost to the point of becoming a ‘gold standard ’ among judgment collection techniques (Bard et al. 1996, Keller 2000, and Keller 2003). While magnitude estimation has been a staple task of psychophysics for over 50 years (Stevens 1957), it has only become a part of linguistic methodology thanks to the demonstration by Bard, Robertson, and Sorace (1996) that it could be profitably adapted for the collection of acceptability judgments. In the ensuing decade, magnitude estimation has been applied to a number of areas of syntactic research with exciting results (e.g., Featherston 2005a, 2005b, Sorace and Keller 2005); however, since that seminal paper there has been relatively little research into the task itself. For example, given that magnitude estimation was originally developed to measure the perception of physical stimuli, there may be certain assumptions built into the magnitude estimation task that may not be compatible with the perception of linguistic acceptability. This paper investigates one such assumption: that participants are able to use the modulus to estimate acceptability along a linear scale.
|
|
URL: http://www.lingref.com/cpp/wccfl/27/paper1855.pdf
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.494.2446
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 6 |
Continuous Acceptability, Categorical Grammaticality, and Experimental Syntax
|
|
|
|
In: Biolinguistics, Vol 1, Iss 0, Pp 123-134 (2007) (2007)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 7 |
RHETORICAL QUESTIONS AS QUESTIONS * Abstract
|
|
|
|
In: http://parles.upf.es/glif/pub/sub11/individual/capo_spro.pdf
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 8 |
1 The differential sensitivity of acceptability judgments to processing effects
|
|
|
|
In: http://www.socsci.uci.edu/~jsprouse/papers/difsense.pdf
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
