Skip to main content
Log in

The maze task: Measuring forced incremental sentence processing time

  • Published:
Behavior Research Methods Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The maze task is an online measure of sentence processing time that provides an alternative to the standard moving window version of self-paced reading. Rather than each word of the sentence being presented in succession, two words are presented at the same time, and the participant must choose which word is a grammatical continuation of the sentence. This procedure forces the reader into an incremental mode of processing in which each word must be fully integrated with the preceding context before the next word can be considered. Previous research with this technique has not considered whether it is sufficiently sensitive to syntactic complexity effects or to garden path effects. Four experiments are reported demonstrating that reliable differences in processing time for subject relatives and object relatives can be obtained, and that this technique generates garden path effects that correspond closely with the data from eyetracking experiments, but without the spillover effects that are sometimes obtained with eyetracking. It is also shown that the task is sensitive to word frequency effects, producing estimates well in excess of those found with eyetracking.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database (Release 2) [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Linguistic Data Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dopkins, S., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1992). Lexical ambiguity and eye fixations in reading: A test of competing models of lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory & Language, 31, 461–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forster, K. I. (1981). Priming and the effects of sentence and lexical contexts on naming time: Evidence for autonomous lexical processing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 465–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 116–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, S. E., & Forster, K. I. (1985). The psychological status of overgenerated sentences. Cognition, 19, 101–131.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A., & Woolley, J. D. (1982). Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111, 228–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, J., & Just, M. A. (1991). Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 30, 580–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D. C. (1987). Lexical guidance in human parsing: Locus and processing characteristics. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 601–681). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D. C. (2004). On-line methods in language processing: Introduction and historical review. In M. Carrieras & C. Clifton (Eds.), The on-line study of sentence comprehension: Eye-tracking, ERP and beyond (pp. 15–32). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicol, J. L., Forster, K. I., & Vereš, C. (1997). Subject-verb agreement processes in comprehension. Journal of Memory & Language, 36, 569–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rayner, K., Liversedge, S. P., & White, S. J. (2006). Reading and disappearing text: Cognitive control of eye movements. Vision Research, 46, 310–323.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D. L., & Rayner, K. (1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review, 105, 125–157.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schilling, H. E. H., Rayner, K., & Chumbley, J. I. (1998). Comparing naming, lexical decision, and eye fixation times: Word frequency effects and individual differences. Memory & Cognition, 26, 1270–1281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuberth, R. E., & Eimas, P. D. (1977). Effects of context on the classification of words and nonwords. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 3, 27–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traxler, M. J., Morris, R. K., & Seely, R. E. (2002). Processing subject and object relative clauses: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory & Language, 47, 69–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Petten, C., & Kutas, M. (1990). Interactions between sentence context and word frequency in event-related brain potentials. Memory & Cognition, 18, 380–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wanner, E., & Maratsos, M. (1978). An ATN approach to comprehension. In M. Halle, J. Bresnan, & G. Miller (Eds.), Linguistic theory and psychological reality (pp. 119–161). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waters, G. S., Caplan, D., & Hildebrandt, N. (1987). Working memory and written sentence comprehension. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 531–555). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kenneth I. Forster.

Additional information

This research was supported in part by a grant from the National Science Foundation.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Forster, K.I., Guerrera, C. & Elliot, L. The maze task: Measuring forced incremental sentence processing time. Behavior Research Methods 41, 163–171 (2009). https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.1.163

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.1.163

Keywords

Navigation