Cue-based retrieval theories in sentence processing predict two classes of interference effect: (i) Inhibitory interference is predicted when multiple items match a retrieval cue: cue-overloading leads to an overall slowdown in reading time; and (ii) Facilitatory interference arises when a retrieval target as well as a distractor only partially match the retrieval cues; this partial matching leads to an overall speedup in retrieval time. Inhibitory interference effects are widely observed, but facilitatory interference apparently has an exception: reflexives have been claimed to show no facilitatory interference effects. Because the claim is based on underpowered studies, we conducted a large-sample experiment that investigated both facilitatory and inhibitory interference. In contrast to previous studies, we find facilitatory interference effects in reflexives. We also present a quantitative evaluation of the cue-based retrieval model of Engelmann et al. (2019), with respect to the reflexives data. Data and code are available from: https://osf.io/reavs/.

中文翻译：

---

重新审视主谓一致和反身的干扰模式：一项大样本研究


句子处理中基于线索的检索理论预测了两类干扰效应：（i）当多个项目与检索线索匹配时，预测抑制性干扰：线索超载导致阅读时间整体减慢； (ii) 当检索目标和干扰项仅部分匹配检索线索时，就会出现促进干扰；这种部分匹配会导致检索时间整体加快。抑制性干扰效应被广泛观察到，但促进性干扰显然有一个例外：反射据称没有表现出促进性干扰效应。由于该主张基于动力不足的研究，因此我们进行了一项大样本实验，研究了促进性干扰和抑制性干扰。与之前的研究相比，我们发现反射性存在易化干扰效应。我们还对 Engelmann 等人基于提示的检索模型进行了定量评估。 （2019），关于反射数据。数据和代码可从以下网址获取：https://osf.io/reavs/。