Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-zkb6p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T21:44:37.096Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Neural plausibility and validation may not be so E-Z

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 March 2004

Sara C. Sereno*
Affiliation:
Psychology Department, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QB, Scotland, United Kingdom
Patrick J. O'Donnell*
Affiliation:
Psychology Department, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QB, Scotland, United Kingdom
Anne B. Sereno*
Affiliation:
Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, UT-Houston Medical School, Houston, TX 77030
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Although the E-Z Reader model accounts well for eye-tracking data, it will be judged by new predictions and consistency with evidence from brain imaging methodologies. The stage architecture proposed for lexical access seems somewhat arbitrary and calculated timings are conservatively slow. There are certain effects in the literature that seem incompatible with the model.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2003