Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-13T00:51:46.744Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bibliography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 December 2024

Yellowlees Douglas
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Writing for the Reader's Brain
A Science-Based Guide
 , pp. 269 - 283
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, J. R., & Bower, G. H. (1972). Recognition and retrieval processes in free recall. Psychological Review 79: 97–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, R. C., Spiro, R. J., & Anderson, M. C. (1978). Schemata as scaffolding for the representation of information in connected discourse. American Educational Research Journal 15/3: 433–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asaridou, S. S., Demir-Lira, Ö. E., Goldin-Meadow, S., Levine, S. C., & Small, S. L. (2020). Language development and brain reorganization in a child born without the left hemisphere. Cortex 127: 290–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In Spence, K. W. & Spence, J. T., eds., The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory. New York: Academic Press, 89–195.Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. D. (2004). Your Memory: A User’s Guide. Buffalo, NY: Firefly Books.Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1993). The recency effect: Implicit learning with explicit retrieval? Memory & Cognition 21/2: 146–155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baddeley, A. D., Thomson, N., & Buchanan, M. (1975). Word length and the structure of short-term memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 14/6: 575–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bain, A. (1890). English Composition and Rhetoric. Enlarged ed. London: Longmans, Green, and Company.Google Scholar
Bazerman, C. (2003). Speech acts, genres, and activity systems: How texts organize activity and people. In Bazerman, C. and Prior, P., eds., What Writing Does and How It Does It: An Introduction to Analyzing Texts and Textual Practices. New York: Routledge, 309–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berk, R. N., & Whalen, E. (1992). Impediments to clarity: An annotated glossary of rhetorical pratfalls and pitfalls. American Journal of Roentgenology 159/5: 1115–1121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berlyne, D. E. (1954). A theory of human curiosity. British Journal of Psychology 45: 180–191.Google ScholarPubMed
Bernal, B., & Ardila, A. (2009). The role of the arcuate fasciculus in conduction aphasia. Brain 132/9: 2309–2316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Billig, M. (2008). The language of critical discourse analysis: The case of nominalization. Discourse & Society 19/6: 783–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J. B., & Bower, G. H. (1979). Episodes as chunks in narrative memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18: 309–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaser, M. (2005). An endangered species in the stomach. Scientific American 292: 38–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bochkarev, V., Shevlyakova, A. V., & Solovyev, V. D. (2012). Average word length dynamics as indicator of cultural changes in society. Social Evolution and History 14: 153–175.Google Scholar
Bock, K. and Griffin, Z. M. (2000). The persistence of structural priming: Transient activation or implicit learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 129/2: 177–192.Google ScholarPubMed
Bock, K., Dell, G. S., Chang, F., & Onishi, K. H. (2007). Persistent structural priming from language comprehension to language production. Cognition 104/3: 437–458.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bornkessel, I., Schlesewsky, M., & Friederici, A. D. (2002). Beyond syntax: Language-related positivities reflect the revision of hierarchies. NeuroReport 13/3: 361–364.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bornkessel, I., Zysset, S., Friederici, A. D., Yves von Cramon, Y., & Schlesewsky, M. (2005). Who did what to whom? The neural basis of argument hierarchies during language comprehension. Neuroimage 26/1: 221–233.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bower, G. H., Black, J. B., & Turner, T. T. (1979). Scripts in memory for text. Cognitive Psychology 11/2 177–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Britt, M. A. (1994). The interaction of referential ambiguity and argument structure in the parsing of prepositional phrases. Journal of Memory and Language 33/2: 251–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Britton, B. K. (1994). Understanding expository text: Building mental structures to induce insights. In Gernsbacher, M. A., ed., Handbook of Psycholinguistics. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 641–674.Google Scholar
Britton, J. (1982). A reader’s expectations. In Pradl, G. M., ed., Prospect and Retrospect: Selected Essays of James Britton. Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook, 130–138.Google Scholar
Brown, A. L. (1982). Learning how to learn from reading. In Langer, J. A. and Smith-Burke, M. T., eds., Reader Meets Author/Bridging the Gap: A Psycholinguistic and Sociolinguistic Perspective. Newark, DE: International Reading Association, 26–54.Google Scholar
Brown, P. C., Roediger, H. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (2014). Make It Stick: The Science of Successful Learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bruner, J. (1986). Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryson, B. (1990). Mother Tongue: English and How It Got That Way. New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar
Büchel, C., Price, C., Frackowiak, R. S., & Friston, K. (1998). Different activation patterns in the visual cortex of late and congenitally blind subjects. Brain 121/3: 409–419.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bullough, O. (2022). Butler to the World: The Book the Oligarchs Don’t Want You to Read - How Britain Helps the World’s Worst People Launder Money, Commit Crimes, and Get Away with Anything. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Burdick, H. (2010). The Origin of the Lexile Specific Equation. Retrieved in 2023 from https://cdn.lexile.com/m/resources/materials/The_Origin_of_the_Lexile_Specification_Equation.pdf.Google Scholar
Canagarajah, A. S. (2006). The place of world Englishes in composition: Pluralization continued. College Composition and Communication 57/4: 586–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, R. H. (1999). Choosing Powerful Words: Eloquence That Works. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
Carter, R. (1998). Mapping the Mind. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Chafe, W. L. (1974). Language and consciousness. Language 50/1: 111–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, F., Dell, G. S., Bock, K., & Griffin, Z. M. (2000). Structural priming as implicit learning: A comparison of models of sentence production. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 29/2: 217–230.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cirilo, R. K. (1981). Referential coherence and text structure in story comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 20/3: 358–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clanchy, M. T. (1979). From Memory to Written Record 1066–1307. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Sengul, C. J. (1979). In search of referents for nouns and pronouns. Memory & Cognition 7/1: 35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clifton, C., Frazier, L., & Connine, C. (1984). Lexical expectations in sentence comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 23/6: 696–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clifton, C., Staub, A., & Rayner, K. (2007). Eye movements in reading words and sentences. In Van Gompel, R. P. G., ed., Eye Movements: A Window on Mind and Brain. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 341–372.Google Scholar
Cordes, J. L. (2002). When liability can attach for remaining passive: Construction of the term ‘Disposal’ under Cercla: Crofton Ventures Limited Partnership v. G & H Partnership 1. Missouri Environmental Law & Policy Review 9: 67–154.Google Scholar
Costello, F. J., & Keane, M. T. (2000). Efficient creativity: Constraint-guided conceptual combination. Cognitive Science 24/2: 299–349.Google Scholar
Coulson, S., King, J. W., & Kutas, M. (1998). Expect the unexpected: Event-related brain response to morphosyntactic violations. Language & Cognitive Processes 13/1: 21–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24: 87–114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crowhurst, M. (1990). Reading/writing relationships: An intervention study. Canadian Journal of Education 15/2: 155–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crystal, D. (2004). The Stories of English. New York: Overlook Press.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. (2005). The Language Revolution. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Culicover, P. W., & Levine, R. D. (2001). Stylistic inversion in English: A reconsideration. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 19/2: 283–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cutrell, E., & Guan, Z. (2007). What are you looking for? An eye-tracking study of information usage in web search. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. San Jose, CA.Google Scholar
Daneman, M. (1982). The measurement of reading comprehension: How not to trade construct validity for predictive power. Intelligence 6/4: 331–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1983). Individual differences in integrating information between and within sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 9/4: 561–584.Google Scholar
Davelaar, E. J., Goshen-Gottstein, Y., Ashkenazi, A., Haarmann, H. J., & Usher, M. (2005). The demise of short-term memory revisited: Empirical and computational investigations of recency effects. Psychological Review 112/1: 3–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, K. (2005). Persuasion through organization: The final installment – transitions. Arizona Attorney: 31–33.Google Scholar
Dee-Lucas, D., Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A., & Daneman, M. (1982). What eye fixations tell us about the time course of text integration. In Groner, R. & Fraisse, P., eds., Cognition and Eye Movements. Leipzig: North-Holland, 155–168.Google Scholar
Dehaene, S. (2009). Reading in the Brain: The Science and Evolution of a Human Invention. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
DeKay, S. H. (2010). Focus on business practices: Designing email messages for corporate readers: A case study of effective and ineffective rhetorical strategies at a Fortune 100 company. Business Communication Quarterly 73/1: 109–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dermer, M. L., Lopez, S. L., & Messling, P. A. (2010). Fluency training a writing skill: Editing for concision. The Psychological Record 59/1: 3–20.Google Scholar
Diederich, P., French, J. W., & Sydell, T. C. (1961). Factors in Judgments of Writing Quality. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, ERIC ED 002 172.Google Scholar
Diemand-Yauman, C., & Vaughn, E. B. (2010). Fortune favors the bold (and the italicized): Effects of disfluency on educational outcomes. Cognition 118: 111–115.Google ScholarPubMed
Divert, C., Mornieux, G., Bauer, H., et al. (2005). Mechanical comparison of barefoot and shod running. International Journal of Sports Medicine 26: 593–598.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doolittle, R. F. (1997). A bug with excess gastric avidity. Nature 388: 515–516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dor, D. (2003). On newspaper headlines as relevance optimizers. Journal of Pragmatics 35/5: 695–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, Y. (2015). The Reader’s Brain: How Neuroscience Can Make You a Better Writer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, Y. (2016). Top-down research, generalists, and Google Scholar: Does Google Scholar facilitate breakthrough research? Open Access Library Journal 3/5: 1.Google Scholar
Douglas, Y. (2017). Do paradoxes prompt better attention and recall? Implications for publishing and disseminating academic research. International Journal of Business Administration 8/3: 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, Y., & Grant, M. B. (2018). The Biomedical Writer: What You Need to Succeed in Academic Medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, Y., & Miller, S. (2016a). Syntactic complexity of reading content directly impacts complexity of mature students’ writing. International Journal of Business Administration 7/3: 71.Google Scholar
Douglas, Y., & Miller, S. (2016b). Syntactic and lexical complexity of reading correlates with complexity of writing in adults. International Journal of Business Administration 7/4: 1–10.Google Scholar
Duffy, A. (2019). Out of the shadows: The editor as a defining characteristic of journalism. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 22/3: 634–649.Google Scholar
Duggan, G. B. & Payne, S. J. (2011). Skim reading by satisficing: Evidence from eye tracking. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: Association for Digital Machinery (ACM), 1141–1150.Google Scholar
Dunbar, K. (1993). Concept discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science 17/3: 397–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunbar, K. (2000). How scientists think in the real world: Implications for science education. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 21/1: 49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenstein, E. L. (1979). The Printing Press as an Agent of Change: Communications and Cultural Transformations in Early Modern Europe. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, E. L. (1983). The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Elbow, P. (2002). Vernacular literacies in the writing classroom? Probing the culture of literacy. In Schroeder, H. F. C. & Bizzell, P., eds., ALT/DIS: Alternative Discourses and the Academy. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 126–138.Google Scholar
Evans, V. (2014). The Language Myth: Why Language Is Not an Instinct. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahnestock, J. (1983). Semantic and lexical coherence. College Composition and Communication 34/4: 400–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, F. (2003). The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology 47: 14–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferreira, F., & Clifton, C. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language 25: 348–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, F., & Stacey, J. (2000). The Misinterpretation of Passive Sentences. Unpublished manuscript. Available from www.researchgate.net/publication/2431950_The_Misinterpretation_of_Passive_Sentences (last accessed March 28, 2024).Google Scholar
Ferreira, F., Bailey, K. G. D., & Ferraro, V. (2002). Good-enough representations in language comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science 11/1: 11–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, S. R. (2005). A History of Reading. Amsterdam: Reaktion Books.Google Scholar
Fish, S. (1980). Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist 35/1: 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flatt, T. (2009). Ageing: Diet and longevity in the balance. Nature 462: 989–990.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fleischman, S. (1990). Tense and Narrativity: From Medieval Performance to Modern Fiction. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Flesch, R. (1974). The Art of Readable Writing. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Flesch, R. (1979). How to Write in Plain English: A Book for Lawyers and Consumers. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Fowler, H. W. (1965). A Dictionary of Modern English Usage. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fox, J. R., Park, B., & Lang, A. (2007). When available resources become negative resources: The effects of cognitive overload on memory sensitivity and criterion bias. Communication Research 34/3: 277–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frase, L. T. (1969). Paragraph organization of written materials: The influence of conceptual clustering upon the level and organization of recall. Journal of Educational Psychology 60/5: 394–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology 14/2: 178–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frazier, L., Taft, L., Roeper, T., Clifton, C., & Ehrlich, K. (1984). Parallel structure: A source of facilitation in sentence comprehension. Memory & Cognition 12/5: 421–430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Furukawa, K. (1998). On the completion of the most specific hypothesis computation in inverse entailment for mutual recursion. Discovery Science: Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1531: 315–325.Google Scholar
Gant, C. & Dimmick, J. (2000). Making local news: A holistic analysis of sources, selection criteria, and topics. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 77/3: 628–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garnham, A., Oakhill, J., & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1982). Referential continuity and the coherence of discourse. Cognition 11/1: 29–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition 68: 1–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glanzer, M. (1972). Storage mechanisms in recall. In Bower, G. H. and Spence, J. T., eds., The Psychology of Learning and Motivation. New York: Academic Press, 129–193.Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. M., & Swanson, N. G. (1986). A temporal distinctiveness theory of recency and modality effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 12/1: 3–15.Google ScholarPubMed
Glover, J. A., Bruning, R. H., & Plake, B. S. (1982). Distinctiveness of encoding and recall of text materials. Journal of Educational Psychology 74/4: 522–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golman, R., & Loewenstein, G. (2015). Curiosity, Information Gaps, and the Utility of Knowledge. Available at https://bit.ly/Golman-Loewenstein (last accessed March 28, 2024).Google Scholar
Gombrich, E. H. (1961). Art and Illusion: A Study in the Psychology of Pictorial Representation. New York: Bollingen Foundation.Google Scholar
Gopen, G., & Swan, J. A. (1990). The science of scientific writing. American Scientist 78: 550–558.Google Scholar
Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Levine, W. H. (2002). Memory-load interference in syntactic processing. Psychological Science 13/5: 425–430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graesser, A. C., Millis, K. K., & Zwaan, R. A. (1997). Discourse comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology 48/1: 163–189.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graesser, A. C., Karnavat, A. B., Daniel, F. K., Cooper, E., Whitten, S. N., & Louwerse, M. (2001). A Computer Tool to Improve Questionnaire Design. Paper Presented at the Funding Opportunity in Survey Research Seminar, June 11.Google Scholar
Graf, P., & Schacter, D. L. (1985). Implicit and explicit memory for new associations in normal and amnesic subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 11/3: 501–518.Google ScholarPubMed
Grandison, R. C., Piper, M. D., & Partridge, L. (2009). Amino acid imbalance explains extension of life span by dietary restriction in Drosophila. Nature 462: 1061–1064.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gray, K. (2022). As their focus on GPA fades, employers seek key skills in college grads’ resumés. National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) Newsletter, November 15.Google Scholar
Greene, S. B., & McKoon, G. (1995). Telling something we can’t know: Experimental approaches to verbs exhibiting implicit causality. Psychological Science 6/5: 262–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. & Morgan, J. L., eds., Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 41–58.Google Scholar
Gunning, R., & Kallan, R. A. (1994). How to Take the FOG out of Business Writing. Chicago, IL: Dartnell.Google Scholar
Hagoort, P., Brown, C., & Groothusen, J. (1993). The syntactic positive shift (SPS) as an ERP measure of syntactic processing. Language & Cognitive Processes 8/4: 439–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hakala, C. M., & O’Brien, E. J. (1995). Strategies for resolving coherence breaks in reading. Discourse Processes 20/2: 167–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Handlin, A., Mosca, J. B., Forgione, D. A., & Pitta, D. (2003). DTC pharmaceutical advertising: The debate’s not over. Journal of Consumer Marketing 20/3: 227–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartsuiker, R. J., Bernolet, S., Schoonbaert, S., Speybroeck, S., & Vanderelst, D. (2008). Syntactic priming persists while the lexical boost decays: Evidence from written and spoken dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language 58/2: 214–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harwood, N. (2005). “Nowhere has anyone attempted … in this article I aim to do just that”: A corpus-based study of self-promotional I and we in academic writing across four disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics 37/8: 1207–1231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heider, F., & Simmel, M. (1944). An experimental study of apparent behavior. The American Journal of Psychology 57/2: 243–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heilman, K. M., Leon, S. A., & Rosenbek, J. C. (2004). Affective aprosodia from a medial frontal stroke. Brain and Language 89/3: 411–416.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herbert, A. S. (1967). Historical Catalogue of Printed Editions of the English Bible: 1525–1961. New York: American Bible Society.Google Scholar
Higgins, D., Burstein, J., Marcu, D., & Gentile, C. (2004). Evaluating multiple aspects of coherence in student essays. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: HLT-NAACL 2004. Boston, MA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 185–192. https://aclanthology.org/N04-1024.pdf.Google Scholar
Horn, J. K. (1988). What employers want in cover letters and resumés. Journal of Education for Business 64/2: 90–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horwitz, B., Rumsey, J. M., & Donohue, B. C. (1998). Functional connectivity of the angular gyrus in reading and dyslexia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 95: 8939–8944.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hunt, R. R. (1995). The subtlety of distinctiveness: What von Restorff really did. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2/1: 105–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 13/2: 133–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics 25/2: 156–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ireland, M. E., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). Language style matching in writing: Synchrony in essays, correspondence, and poetry. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 99/3: 549–571.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ito, T. A., Larsen, J. T., Smith, N. K., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1998). Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: The negativity bias in evaluative categorizations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75/4: 887–900.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, S. (2006). The Ghost Map: The Story of London’s Most Terrifying Epidemic – and How It Changed Science, Cities, and the Modern World. New York: Riverhead.Google Scholar
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review 87/4: 329–354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A., Keller, T. A., Eddy, W. F., & Thulborn, K. A. (1996). Brain activation modulated by sentence comprehension. Science 274: 114–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kagan, J. (1972). Motives and development. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 22: 51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kang, M. J., Hsu, M., Krajbich, I. M., Loewenstein, G., McClure, S. M., Wang, J. T., & Camerer, C. F. (2009). The wick in the candle of learning: Epistemic curiosity activates reward circuitry and enhances memory. Psychological Science 20: 963–973.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kearns, K. (1988). Light Verbs in English. Unpublished paper. Available from https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:116138945 (last accessed March 28, 2024).Google Scholar
Kell, D. B., & Oliver, S. G. (2004). Here is the evidence, now what is the hypothesis? The complementary roles of inductive and hypothesis‐driven science in the post‐genomic era. Bioessays 26/1: 99–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kidd, C., & Hayden, B. Y. (2015). The psychology and neuroscience of curiosity. Neuron 88/3: 449–460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kieras, D. E. (1978). Good and bad structure in simple paragraphs: Effects on apparent theme, reading time, and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 17/1: 13–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, J., & Just, M. A. (1991). Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language 30/5: 580–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinsbourne, M., & George, J. (1974). The mechanism of the word-frequency effect on recognition memory. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior 13: 63–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review 95/2: 163–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kintsch, W. (2002). On the notions of theme and topic in psychological process models of text comprehension. Thematics: Interdisciplinary Studies 3: 157–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review 85/5: 363–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kintsch, W., & Vipond, D. (1979). Reading comprehension and readability in educational practice and psychological theory. In Nilsson, L.-G., ed., Perspectives on Memory Research: Essays in Honor of Uppsala University’s 500th Anniversary. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 329–365.Google Scholar
Klahr, D., Fay, A. L., & Dunbar, K. (1993). Heuristics for scientific experimentation: A developmental study. Cognitive Psychology 25/1: 111–146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klee, H., & Legge, D. (1976). Estimates of concreteness and other indices for 200 transitive verbs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 2/4: 497–507.Google Scholar
Knoblauch, C. H., & Brannon, L. (1984). Rhetorical Traditions and the Teaching of Writing. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.Google Scholar
Kotzee, B., & Johnston, R. (2011). “Can’t string a sentence together”? UK employers’ views of graduates’ writing skills. Industry and Higher Education 25/1: 45–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreiner, J. (2023). The Wandering Mind: What Medieval Monks Tell Us about Distraction. New York: Liveright Publishing.Google Scholar
Kruger, J., & Evans, M. (2004). If you don’t want to be late, enumerate: Unpacking reduces the planning fallacy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 40/5: 586–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuperberg, G. R., Caplan, D., Sitnikova, T., Eddy, M., & Holcomb, P. J. (2006). Neural correlates of processing syntactic, semantic, and thematic relationships in sentences. Language and Cognitive Processes 21/5: 489–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). Language in the Inner City. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Lagerqvist, B., James, S. K., Stenestrand, U., et al. (2007). Long-term outcomes with drug-eluting stents versus bare metal stents in Sweden. New England Journal of Medicine 356: 1009–1019.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lalonde, R., & Strazielle, C. (2007). Brain regions and genes affecting postural control. Progress in Neurobiology 81/1: 45–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lamb, E. (2015). Contrasts in number theory. Scientific American Blog Network. Accessed January 31, 2023 from https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/roots-of-unity/contrasts-in-number-theory/.Google Scholar
Landauer, T. (1995). The Trouble with Computers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lane, M., & Conlon, G. (2016). The impact of literacy, numeracy and computer skills on earnings and employment outcomes. OECD Education Working Papers 129.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Engineers and Scientists through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lebovits, G. (2006). The department of redundancy department: Concision and succinctness – Part II. New York State Bar Association Journal 78/7: 44–54.Google Scholar
Lepore, J. (2014). Away from my desk. The New Yorker, May 12: 72–74.Google Scholar
Leslie, A., & Keeble, S. (1987). Do six-month-old infants perceive causality? Cognition 25: 265–288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levitsky, V., & Melnyk, Y. P. (2011). Sentence length and sentence structure in English prose. Glottometrics 21: 14–24.Google Scholar
Lieberman, P. (2001). Human language and our reptilian brain: The subcortical bases of speech, syntax, and thought. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 44/1: 32–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Limaye, M. R., & Cherry, R. D. (1987). Pragmatics, “situated” language, and business communication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 1/1: 68–88.Google Scholar
Locker, K. O. (1987). “As per your request”: A history of business jargon. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 1/1: 27–47.Google Scholar
Lorch, R. F., & Lorch, E. P. (1985). Topic structure representation and text recall. Journal of Education Psychology 77/2: 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowry, P. B., Curtis, A., & Lowry, M. R. (2004). Building a taxonomy and nomenclature of collaborative writing to improve interdisciplinary research and practice. Journal of Business Communication 41/1: 66–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luchins, A. S. (1958). Definitiveness of impression and primacy-recency in communications. The Journal of Social Psychology 48/2: 275–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupker, S. J. (1984). Semantic priming without association: A second look. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 23/6: 709–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackay, W. E. (2000). Responding to cognitive overload: Co-adaptation between users and technology. Intellectica 30/1: 177–193.Google Scholar
Manguel, A. (1996). A History of Reading. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
Marshall, B., Warren, J. R., Blincow, E., Phillips, M., Goodwin, C. S., Murray, R., Blackbourn, S., Waters, T., & Sanderson, C. (1988). Prospective double-blind trial of duodenal ulcer relapse after eradication of Campylobacter pylori. The Lancet 332/8626: 1437–1442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, W. L., Murray, P. S., & Bates, P. R. (2012). The effects of startle on pilots during critical events: A case study analysis. In Proceedings of 30th EAAP Conference: Aviation Psychology & Applied Human Factors, 387–394.Google Scholar
Martin, W. L., Murray, P. S., Bates, P. R., & Lee, P. S. (2015). Fear-potentiated startle: A review from an aviation perspective. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 25/2: 97–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, R. A., Just, M. A., Keller, T. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (2003). Ambiguity in the brain: What brain imaging reveals about the processing of syntactically ambiguous sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition 29/6: 1319–1338.Google ScholarPubMed
Masson, M. E. (1982). Cognitive processes in skimming stories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 8/5: 400–417.Google Scholar
Matsuda, P. K., & Tardy, C. M. (2007). Voice in academic writing: The rhetorical construction of author identity in blind manuscript review. English for Specific Purposes 26/2: 235–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (1976). Integration of information during problem solving due to a meaningful context of learning. Memory & Cognition 4/5: 603–608.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCarthy, P. M., Renner, A. M., Duncan, M. G., Duran, N. D., Lightman, E. J., & McNamara, D. S. (2008). Identifying topic sentencehood. Behavior Research Methods 40/3: 647–664.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCrum, R., Cran, W., & MacNeil, R. (1992). The Story of English. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
McNamara, D. S., Crossley, S. A., & McCarthy, P. M. (2010). Linguistic features of writing quality. Written Communication 27/1: 57–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNamara, T. P. (1994). Theories of priming: II. Types of primes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 20/3: 507–520.Google Scholar
McWhorter, J. (2001). The Power of Babel: A Natural History of Language. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Michael, E. B., Keller, T. A., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (2001). fMRI investigation of sentence comprehension by eye and by ear: Modality fingerprints on cognitive processes. Human Brain Mapping 13: 239–252.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Michotte, A. (1963). The Perception of Causality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 63: 81–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, J. R., & Kintsch, W. (1980). Recall and Readability of Short Prose Passages. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Conference, Boston, MA. April 7–11.Google Scholar
Miyake, A., Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1994). Working memory constraints on the resolution of lexical ambiguity: Maintaining multiple interpretations in neutral contexts. Journal of Memory and Language 33/2: 175–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monmaney, T. (1993). Marshall’s lunch. The New Yorker, September 20, 1993, 64–72.Google Scholar
Moore, G. E. (1965). Cramming more components onto integrated circuits. Electronics, April 19: 114–117.Google Scholar
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). A learner-centered approach to multimedia explanations: Deriving instructional design principles from cognitive theory. Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning 2/2: 12–20.Google Scholar
Murdock, B. B. (1962). The serial position effect of free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology 64/5: 482–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, J. D., & McGlone, C. (1997). Topic overviews and processing of topic structure. Journal of Educational Psychology 89/2: 251–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). (2023). What are barnacles? National Ocean Service. Retrieved February 28, 2023, from https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/barnacles.html.Google Scholar
Nell, V. (1988). Lost in a Book: The Psychology of Reading for Pleasure. Newhaven, CT: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newell, G. E. (2006). Writing to learn: How alternative theories of school writing account for student performance. In MacArthur, C. A., Graham, S., & Fitzgerald, J., eds., Handbook of Writing Research. New York: The Guilford Press, 235–247.Google Scholar
Newman, S. D., Just, M. A., Keller, T. A., Roth, J., & Carpenter, P. A. (2003). Differential effects of syntactic and semantic processing on the subregions of Broca’s area. Cognitive Brain Research 16: 297–307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicholas, S. (1998). Perceptual and conceptual priming of individual words in coherent texts. Memory 6/6: 643–663.Google Scholar
Niederhoffer, K. G., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2002). Linguistic synchrony in social interaction. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 21/4: 337–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, J. (2006). F-shaped pattern for reading web content. Neilsen Norman Group. Available at www.nngroup.com/articles/f-shaped-pattern-reading-web-content-discovered/ (last accessed March 28, 2024).Google Scholar
Nietzsche, F. (1961). Thus Spoke Zarathustra. R. J. Hollingdale, trans. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Nishimura, H., Hashikawa, K., Doi, K., Iwaki, T., Watanabe, Y., Kusuoka, H., Nishimura, T., & Kubo, T. (1999). Sign language “heard” in the auditory cortex. Nature 397: 116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noordman, L., Vonk, W., & Kempff, H. J. (1992). Causal inferences during the reading of expository texts. Journal of Memory and Language 31/5: 573–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norman, S., Kemper, S., Kynette, D., Cheung, H., & Anagnopoulos, C. (1991). Syntactic complexity and adults’ running memory span. Journal of Gerontology 46/6: 346–351.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
North, P. (2012). Apparent critique: Inferences from a Benjaminian sketch. Diacritics 40/1: 70–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, D. R. (1991). Literacy and objectivity: The rise of modern science. In Olson, D. R. & Torrance, N., eds., Literacy and Orality. New York: Cambridge University Press, 149–164.Google Scholar
Olson, D. R. & Filby, N. (1972). On the comprehension of active and passive sentences. Cognitive Psychology 3/3: 361–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. New York: Methuen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orwell, G. (1986). Politics and the English language. In Abrams, M. H., ed., The Norton Anthology of English Literature. London: W. W. Norton, 2260–2270.Google Scholar
Osterhout, L., Holcomb, P. J., & Swinney, D. A. (1994). Brain potentials elicited by garden-path sentences: Evidence of the application of verb information during parsing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 20/4: 786–803.Google ScholarPubMed
Paivio, A. (1990). Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patel, A. D. (2010). Music, Language, and the Brain. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Paulesu, E., Frith, C. D., & Frackowiak, R. S. J. (1993). The neural correlates of the verbal component of working memory. Nature 362/25: 342–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pennebaker, J. W. (2011). The Secret Life of Pronouns: What Our Words Say About Us. New York: Bloomsbury Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perfetti, C. A. (1999). Comprehending written language: A blueprint of the reader. In Brown, C. M. & Hagoort, P., eds., The Neurocognition of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 167–208.Google Scholar
Pezzo, M. V. (2003). Surprise, defence, or making sense: What removes hindsight bias? Memory 11: 421–441.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pickering, M. J., & Branigan, H. P. (1998). The representation of verbs: Evidence from syntactic priming in language production. Journal of Memory and Language 39: 633–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, M. J., & Ferreira, V. S. (2008). Structural priming: A critical review. Psychological Bulletin 134/3: 427–459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2013). Forward models and their implications for production, comprehension, and dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36/4: 377–392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinker, S. (1994). The Language Instinct: How the Mind Generates Language. New York: Harper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollatsek, A., Bolozky, S., Well, A. D., & Rayner, K. (1981). Asymmetries in the perceptual span for Israeli readers. Brain and Language 14/1: 174–180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Price, B. D. (1974). Noun overuse phenomenon article. The Language Quarterly 2/4: 29–37.Google Scholar
Ramachandran, V. S. (2011). The Tell-Tale Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Quest for What Makes Us Human. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Rayner, K., Carlson, C., & Frazier, L. (1983). The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 22/3: 358–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayner, K., Foorman, B. R., Perfetti, C. A., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2001). How psychological science informs the teaching of reading. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 2/2: 31–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rayner, K., Well, A. D., & Pollatsek, A. (1980). Asymmetry of the effective visual field in reading. Perception and Psychophysics 27/6: 537–544.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rhodes, S. (1997). The Active and Passive Voice Are Equally Comprehensible in Scientific Writing. Ph.D. thesis, University of Washington. Available as of 2024 at https://digital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/bitstream/handle/1773/9033/9819294.pdf.Google Scholar
Richards, I. A. (1930). Practical Criticism: A Study of Literary Judgment. London: Kegan Paul Trench Trubner & Co.Google Scholar
Ritchey, K. A. (2011). How generalization inferences are constructed in expository text comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology 36/4: 280–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rumelhart, D. (1975). Notes on a schema for stories. In Bobrow, D. G. & Collins, A., eds., Representation and Understanding. New York: Academic Press, 211–235.Google Scholar
Salager-Meyer, F. (1994). Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse. English for Specific Purposes 13/2: 149–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuels, S. J., & Kamil, M. L. (1984). Models of the reading process. Handbook of Reading Research 1: 185–224.Google Scholar
Schank, R. C. (1982). Dynamic Memory: A Theory of Reminding and Learning in Computers and People. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schank, R., & Abelson, R. (1977). Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Schnotz, W., & Kürschner, C. (2007). A reconsideration of cognitive load theory. Educational Psychology Review 19: 469–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidenberg, M. (2017). Language at the Speed of Sight. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Shanahan, T. (1984). Nature of the reading–writing relation: An exploratory multivariate analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology 76/3: 466–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shanahan, T. (2006). Relations among oral language, reading, and writing development. In MacArthur, C. A., Graham, S. & Fitzgerald, J., eds., Handbook of Writing Research. New York: The Guilford Press, 171–186.Google Scholar
Shanahan, T., & Lomax, R. G. (1986). An analysis and comparison of theoretical models of the reading–writing relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology 78/2: 116–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sloan, G. (1988). Relational ambiguity between sentences. College Composition and Communication 39/2: 154–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, F. (2012). Understanding Reading: A Psycholinguistic Analysis of Reading and Learning to Read. 6th ed. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Speedie, L. J., Wertman, E., Ta’ir, J., & Heilman, K. M. (1993). Disruption of automatic speech following a right basal ganglia lesion. Neurology 43/9: 1768–1774.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1985). Loose talk. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 86/1: 153–171.Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (2002). Pragmatics, modularity and mind‐reading. Mind & Language 17/1–2: 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (2004). Relevance theory. In Horn, L. & Ward, G., eds., Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell, 607–632.Google Scholar
Spiro, R. J. (1980). Prior knowledge and story processing: Integration, selection, and variation. Poetics 9/1: 313–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spyridakis, J. H., & Fukuoka, W. (2002). The effect of inductively versus deductively organized text on American and Japanese readers. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 45/2: 99–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stallings, L. M., MacDonald, M. C., & O’Seaghdha, P. (1998). Phrasal ordering constraints in sentence production: Phrase length and verb disposition in heavy-NP shift. Journal of Memory & Language 39: 392–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinman, L. (2003). Collateral damage repaired. Nature 422: 671–672.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stelzner, H. G. (1966). ‘War Message,’ December 8, 1941: An approach to language. Communications Monographs 33/4: 419–437.Google Scholar
Stephens, M., & Lanson, G. (1993). Writing and Reporting the News. New York: Harcourt.Google Scholar
Street, B. V. (1984). Literacy in Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Strunk, W., & White, E. (1999). The Elements of Style. 4th ed. London: Pearson.Google Scholar
Subramanyam, R. (2013). Art of reading a journal article: Methodically and effectively. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology: JOMFP 17/1: 65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, B. (2023). An inflection point for GOATs: Please quiet quit these “banished words” moving forward. NPR. Retrieved January 11, 2023, from www.npr.org/2023/01/01/1146517288/goat-gaslighting-banished-words.Google Scholar
Temperly, D. (2007). Minimization of dependency length in written English. Cognition 105: 300–333.Google Scholar
Teubner, T., Flath, C. M., Weinhardt, C., van der Aalst, W., & Hinz, O. (2023). Welcome to the era of ChatGPT et al. Business & Information Systems Engineering 65/2: 95–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thapar, A., & Greene, R. L. (1993). Evidence against a short-term store account of long-term recency effects. Memory & Cognition 21/3: 329–337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Therriault, D. J., & Raney, G. E. (2002). The representation and comprehension of place-on-the-page and text-sequence memory. Scientific Studies of Reading 6/2: 117–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trabasso, T., & van den Broek, P. (1985). Causal thinking and the representation of narrative events. Journal of Memory and Language 24/5: 612–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tulving, E., & Kroll, N. (1995). Novelty assessment in the brain and long-term memory encoding. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2/3: 387–390.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tulving, E., & Pearlstone, Z. (1966). Availability versus accessibility of information in memory for words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 5/4: 381–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology 5: 207–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, L. K., Russell, R., Fadili, J., & Moss, H. E. (2001). The neural representation of nouns and verbs: PET studies. Brain 124/8: 1619–1634.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van den Broek, P., Lorch, R. F., Linderholm, T., & Gustafson, M. (2001). The effects of readers’ goals on inference generation and memory for texts. Memory & Cognition 29/8: 1081–1087.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Dijk, T. A. (1988). The News as Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, T. A. (2008). Critical discourse analysis and nominalization: Problem or pseudo-problem? Discourse & Society 19/6: 821–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Dijk, T. A. (2019). Macrostructures: An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structures in Discourse, Interaction, and Cognition. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waller, M. J., Conte, J. M., Gibson, C. B., & Carpenter, M. A. (2001 ). The effect of individual perceptions of deadlines on team performance. Academy of Management Review 26/4: 586–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weintraub, P. (2010). The Discover Interview: Barry Marshall. Discover 31: 66–74.Google Scholar
Wikborg, E. (1985). Unspecified topic in university student essays. Text – Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse 5/4: 359–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. M. (1995). Style: Toward Clarity and Grace. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Williams, J. P., Taylor, M. B., & Ganger, S. (1981). Text variations at the level of the individual sentence and the comprehension of simple expository paragraphs. Journal of Educational Psychology 73/6: 851–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, E. V. (2002). Email winners and losers. Communications of the ACM 45/10: 121–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wydick, R. C. (1998). Plain English for Lawyers. 4th ed. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.Google Scholar
Yore, L. D., & Shymansky, J. A. (1985). Reading, understanding, remembering and using information in written science materials. Association for the Education of Teachers in Science. Columbus, OH: ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED258 825, 1–59.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A. (1994). Effect of genre expectations on text comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 20/4: 920–933.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A. (1996). Processing narrative time shifts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 22/5: 1196–1207.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin 123/2: 162–185.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zwaan, R. A., Langston, M. C., & Graesser, A. (1995). The construction of situation models in narrative comprehension: An event-indexing model. Psychological Science 6: 292–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Bibliography
  • Yellowlees Douglas
  • Book: Writing for the Reader's Brain
  • Online publication: 12 December 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009221818.010
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Bibliography
  • Yellowlees Douglas
  • Book: Writing for the Reader's Brain
  • Online publication: 12 December 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009221818.010
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Bibliography
  • Yellowlees Douglas
  • Book: Writing for the Reader's Brain
  • Online publication: 12 December 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009221818.010
Available formats
×