English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Response latencies in sentence-picture verification tasks were compared as a function of whether a mismatch was located in the logical subject (LS), verb (V), or logical object (LO) of the sentence. Sentences were presented auditorily and varied in voice and reversibility. The comparison process for nonreversibles was clearly serial self-terminating: latencies for both actives and passives were ordered LS &lt; V &lt; LO, or, after practice with a small number of mismatch types, LS &lt; LO &lt; V. Latencies for reversibles were ordered V &lt; LS = LO, suggesting either a verb-first comparison process or an LS-V-LO comparison process which did not terminate with a subject-mismatch because of the confusability of the subject and object. The results attest to the importance of considering the "naturalness" of stimuli in sentence processing tasks, and the flexibility of subjects' encoding and comparison strategies both within and across task contexts.

Processing strategies in sentence comprehension