Adrian Staub to Humans
This is a "connection" page, showing publications Adrian Staub has written about Humans.
Connection Strength
0.706
-
Staub A, Chen A, Peck E, Taylor N. Estimating the rate of failure to notice function?word errors in natural reading. Psychon Bull Rev. 2025 Apr; 32(2):847-854.
Score: 0.036
-
Staub A, McMurray H, Wickett A. Perceptual inference corrects function word errors in reading: Errors that are not noticed do not disrupt eye movements. Cogn Psychol. 2024 Nov; 154:101691.
Score: 0.036
-
Staub A. The function/content word distinction and eye movements in reading. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2024 Jun; 50(6):967-984.
Score: 0.034
-
Huang KJ, Staub A. The transposed-word effect does not require parallel word processing: Failure to notice transpositions with serial presentation of words. Psychon Bull Rev. 2023 Feb; 30(1):393-400.
Score: 0.031
-
Huber DE, Cohen AL, Staub A. A 'compensatory selection' effect with standardized tests: Lack of correlation between test scores and success is evidence that test scores are predictive of success. PLoS One. 2022; 17(5):e0265459.
Score: 0.031
-
Huang KJ, Staub A. Using eye tracking to investigate failure to notice word transpositions in reading. Cognition. 2021 11; 216:104846.
Score: 0.029
-
Ristic B, Mancini S, Molinaro N, Staub A. Maintenance cost in the processing of subject-verb dependencies. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2022 Jun; 48(6):829-838.
Score: 0.028
-
Staub A. Do effects of visual contrast and font difficulty on readers' eye movements interact with effects of word frequency or predictability? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2020 Nov; 46(11):1235-1251.
Score: 0.027
-
Foppolo F, Staub A. The puzzle of number agreement with disjunction. Cognition. 2020 05; 198:104161.
Score: 0.026
-
Staub A, Dodge S, Cohen AL. Failure to detect function word repetitions and omissions in reading: Are eye movements to blame? Psychon Bull Rev. 2019 Feb; 26(1):340-346.
Score: 0.025
-
Kush D, Dillon B, Eik R, Staub A. Processing of Norwegian complex verbs: Evidence for early decomposition. Mem Cognit. 2019 02; 47(2):335-350.
Score: 0.025
-
Staub A, Goddard K. The role of preview validity in predictability and frequency effects on eye movements in reading. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2019 Jan; 45(1):110-127.
Score: 0.023
-
Cohen AL, Sidlowski S, Staub A. Beliefs and Bayesian reasoning. Psychon Bull Rev. 2017 06; 24(3):972-978.
Score: 0.022
-
Staub A, Dillon B, Clifton C. The Matrix Verb as a Source of Comprehension Difficulty in Object Relative Sentences. Cogn Sci. 2017 May; 41 Suppl 6:1353-1376.
Score: 0.021
-
Kingston J, Levy J, Rysling A, Staub A. Eye movement evidence for an immediate Ganong effect. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2016 12; 42(12):1969-1988.
Score: 0.021
-
Cohen AL, Staub A. Within-subject consistency and between-subject variability in Bayesian reasoning strategies. Cogn Psychol. 2015 Sep; 81:26-47.
Score: 0.019
-
Kretzschmar F, Schlesewsky M, Staub A. Dissociating word frequency and predictability effects in reading: Evidence from coregistration of eye movements and EEG. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2015 Nov; 41(6):1648-62.
Score: 0.019
-
Helfer KS, Staub A. Competing speech perception in older and younger adults: behavioral and eye-movement evidence. Ear Hear. 2014 Mar-Apr; 35(2):161-70.
Score: 0.017
-
Staub A, Benatar A. Individual differences in fixation duration distributions in reading. Psychon Bull Rev. 2013 Dec; 20(6):1304-11.
Score: 0.017
-
Cohen AL, Staub A. Online processing of novel noun-noun compounds: eye movement evidence. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2014; 67(1):147-65.
Score: 0.017
-
Bogartz RS, Staub A. Gaze step distributions reflect fixations and saccades: a comment on. Cognition. 2012 May; 123(2):325-34.
Score: 0.015
-
White SJ, Staub A. The distribution of fixation durations during reading: effects of stimulus quality. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2012 Jun; 38(3):603-17.
Score: 0.015
-
Staub A, Grant M, Clifton C, Rayner K. Still no phonological typicality effect on word reading time (and no good explanation of one, either): a rejoinder to Farmer, Monaghan, Misyak, and Christiansen. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2011 Sep; 37(5):1326-8.
Score: 0.015
-
Staub A. Word recognition and syntactic attachment in reading: evidence for a staged architecture. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2011 Aug; 140(3):407-33.
Score: 0.015
-
Staub A. The effect of lexical predictability on distributions of eye fixation durations. Psychon Bull Rev. 2011 Apr; 18(2):371-6.
Score: 0.014
-
Staub A, White SJ, Drieghe D, Hollway EC, Rayner K. Distributional effects of word frequency on eye fixation durations. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2010 Oct; 36(5):1280-93.
Score: 0.014
-
Staub A. Eye movements and processing difficulty in object relative clauses. Cognition. 2010 Jul; 116(1):71-86.
Score: 0.013
-
Staub A. Response time distributional evidence for distinct varieties of number attraction. Cognition. 2010 Mar; 114(3):447-54.
Score: 0.013
-
Staub A, Grant M, Clifton C, Rayner K. Phonological typicality does not influence fixation durations in normal reading. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009 May; 35(3):806-14.
Score: 0.013
-
Staub A, Rayner K, Pollatsek A, Hy?n? J, Majewski H. The time course of plausibility effects on eye movements in reading: evidence from noun-noun compounds. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007 Nov; 33(6):1162-9.
Score: 0.011
-
Staub A. The parser doesn't ignore intransitivity, after all. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007 May; 33(3):550-69.
Score: 0.011
-
Staub A, Clifton C. Syntactic prediction in language comprehension: evidence from either...or. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2006 Mar; 32(2):425-36.
Score: 0.010
-
Hammerly C, Staub A, Dillon B. Person-based prominence guides incremental interpretation: Evidence from obviation in Ojibwe. Cognition. 2022 08; 225:105122.
Score: 0.008
-
Yao P, Staub A, Li X. Predictability eliminates neighborhood effects during Chinese sentence reading. Psychon Bull Rev. 2022 Feb; 29(1):243-252.
Score: 0.007
-
Hammerly C, Staub A, Dillon B. The grammaticality asymmetry in agreement attraction reflects response bias: Experimental and modeling evidence. Cogn Psychol. 2019 05; 110:70-104.
Score: 0.006
-
Yang J, Staub A, Li N, Wang S, Rayner K. Plausibility effects when reading one- and two-character words in Chinese: evidence from eye movements. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2012 Nov; 38(6):1801-9.
Score: 0.004
-
Johnson RL, Staub A, Fleri AM. Distributional analysis of the transposed-letter neighborhood effect on naming latency. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2012 Nov; 38(6):1773-9.
Score: 0.004
-
Slattery TJ, Staub A, Rayner K. Saccade launch site as a predictor of fixation durations in reading: comments on Hand, Miellet, O'Donnell, and Sereno (2010). J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2012 Feb; 38(1):251-61.
Score: 0.004
-
Drieghe D, Pollatsek A, Staub A, Rayner K. The word grouping hypothesis and eye movements during reading. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Nov; 34(6):1552-60.
Score: 0.003
-
Potter MC, Staub A, O'Connor DH, Potter MC. Pictorial and conceptual representation of glimpsed pictures. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2004 Jun; 30(3):478-89.
Score: 0.002
-
Potter MC, Staub A, O'Connor DH. The time course of competition for attention: attention is initially labile. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2002 Oct; 28(5):1149-62.
Score: 0.002
-
Potter MC, Staub A, Rado J, O'Connor DH. Recognition memory for briefly presented pictures: the time course of rapid forgetting. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2002 Oct; 28(5):1163-75.
Score: 0.002