Models of retrieval in sentence comprehension: A computational evaluation using Bayesian hierarchical modeling

TL;DR

This paper evaluates two computational models of retrieval in sentence comprehension using Bayesian hierarchical modeling, finding that the direct access model fits some data better, but a modified activation model can also match its performance.

Contribution

It introduces a Bayesian hierarchical framework to compare activation-based and direct access retrieval models, proposing a modification to the activation model for better data fit.

Findings

The direct access model fits some data aspects better.

A modified activation model with different variances matches the direct access model.

Some retrieval behaviors may be explained by a noisier evidence accumulation process.

Abstract

Research on interference has provided evidence that the formation of dependencies between non-adjacent words relies on a cue-based retrieval mechanism. Two different models can account for one of the main predictions of interference, i.e., a slowdown at a retrieval site, when several items share a feature associated with a retrieval cue: Lewis and Vasishth's (2005) activation-based model and McElree's (2000) direct access model. Even though these two models have been used almost interchangeably, they are based on different assumptions and predict differences in the relationship between reading times and response accuracy. The activation-based model follows the assumptions of ACT-R, and its retrieval process behaves as a lognormal race between accumulators of evidence with a single variance. Under this model, accuracy of the retrieval is determined by the winner of the race and retrieval time by its rate of accumulation. In contrast, the direct access model assumes a model of memory where only the probability of retrieval varies between items; in this model, differences in latencies are a by-product of the possibility and repairing incorrect retrievals. We implemented both models in a Bayesian hierarchical framework in order to evaluate them and compare them. We show that some aspects of the data are better fit under the direct access model than under the activation-based model. We suggest that this finding does not rule out the possibility that retrieval may be behaving as a race model with assumptions that follow less closely the ones from the ACT-R framework. We show that by introducing a modification of the activation model, i.e, by assuming that the accumulation of evidence for retrieval of incorrect items is not only slower but noisier (i.e., different variances for the correct and incorrect items), the model can provide a fit as good as the one of the direct access model.