Zum Inhalt springenZur Suche springen

Publikationen

  • Repp, S. & Spalek, K. (2021). The role of alternatives in language. Frontiers in Communication, 6, 111.
  • Koch, X. & Spalek, K. (2021). Contrastive intonation effects on word recall for information-structural alternatives across the sexes. Memory & Cognition, 1-22. 
  • Jördens, K. A., Gotzner, N., & Spalek, K. (2020). The role of non-categorical relations in establishing focus alternative sets. Language and Cognition, 12(4), 729-754.
  • Tjuka, A., Nguyen, H. T. T., & Spalek, K. (2020). Foxes, deer, and hedgehogs: The recall of focus alternatives in Vietnamese. Laboratory Phonology, 11(1):16, 1-29.
  • Gotzner, N., & Spalek, K. (2019). The life and times of focus alternatives: Tracing the activation of alternatives to a focused constituent in language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass, 13, e12310.
  • Spalek, K., & Oganian, Y. (2019). The neurocognitive signature of focus alternatives. Brain and Language, 194, 98-108.

  • Ndao, A.-L., & Spalek, K. (2019). What's the alternative? Experimental research on the extent of focus alternative sets. In: A. Gattnar, R. Hörnig, M. Störzer, & S. Featherston (eds.). Proceedings of Linguistic Evidence 2018: Experimental Data Drives Linguistic Theory. Tübingen: University of Tübingen.

  • Burmester, J., Spalek, K., & Wartenburger, I. (2019). Visual attention-capture cue in depicted scenes fails to modulate online sentence processing. Dialogue & Discourse, 10, 79-104.

  • Burmester, J., Sauermann, A., Spalek, K., & Wartenburger, I. (2018). Sensitivity to salience: linguistic vs. visual cues affect sentence processing and pronoun resolution. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, doi:10.1080/23273798.2018.1428758.

  • Gotzner, N. & Spalek, K. (2017). The role of contrastive and non-contrastive alternatives in the interpretation of focus particles. Discourse Processes54, 638-654. doi:10.1080/0163853X.2016.1148981.

  • Spalek, K.*, & Zeldes, A.* (2017). Converging evidence for the relevance of alternative sets: Data from NPs with focus sensitive particles in German. Language and Cognition9, 24-51. doi:10.1017/langcog.2015.12. * shared first authorship

  • Gotzner, N., Wartenburger, I., & Spalek, K. (2016). The impact of focus particles on the recognition and rejection of contrastive alternatives. Language and Cognition, 8, 59-95, doi:10.1017/langcog.2015.25.

  • Burmester, J., Spalek, K., & Wartenburger, I. (2014). Context updating during sentence comprehension: The effect of aboutness topic. Brain and Language, 137, 62-76.

  • Gotzner, N., & Spalek, K. (2014). Exhaustive inferences and additive presuppositions: The interplay of focus operators and contrastive intonation. In J. Degen, M. Franke, & N. Goodman (Eds.), Proceedings of the Formal & Experimental Pragmatics Workshop, 7-13, Tübingen.

  • Spalek, K., Gotzner, N., Wartenburger, I. (2014). Not only the apples: Focus sensitive particles improve memory for information-structural alternatives. Journal of Memory and Language, 70, 68-84.

  • Spalek, K., Gotzner, N., & Wartenburger, I. (2014). Small words, big impact: How the focus particles “even” and “only” improve memory for sentence content. Atomium Culture.

  • Burmester, J., Wartenburger, I., & Spalek, K. (2013). The effect of discourse context on online sentence processing. In M. Knauff, M. Pauen, N. Sebanz, & I. Wachsmuth (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society [pp. 251-256]. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.

  • Gotzner, N., Spalek, K., & Wartenburger, I. (2013). How pitch accents and focus particles affect the recognition of contextual alternatives. In M. Knauff, M. Pauen, N. Sebanz, & I. Wachsmuth (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society [pp. 2434-2439]. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.

  • Damian, M. F., & Spalek, K. (2014). Processing different kinds of semantic relations in picture-word interference with non-masked and masked distractors. Frontiers in Psychology, doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01183.

  • Spalek, K., Damian, M. F., & Bölte, J. (2013). Is lexical selection in spoken word production competitive? Introduction to the Special Issue on lexical competition in language production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28, 577-614.

  • Hutson, J., Damian, M. F., & Spalek, K. (2013). Distractor frequency effects in picture-word interference tasks with vocal and manual responses. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28, 615-632.

  • Spalek, K. Time-course data as evidence for lexical selection mechanisms. Invited paper presented at the International Workshop on Language Production, New York City, NY, USA, Juli 2012

Verantwortlichkeit: