Publications

2016

  • Poletiek F.H., Fitz H. & Bocanegra B.R. (2016), What baboons can (not) tell us about natural language grammars (Discussion), Cognition 151: 108-112.

2015

  • Van den Bos E. & Poletiek F.H. (2015), Learning simple and complex artificial grammars in the presence of a semantic reference field: Effects on performance and awareness, Frontiers in psychology 6: e158.
  • Van Bommel T., O'Dwyer C., Zuidgeest T.W.M. & Poletiek F.H. (2015), When the reaper becomes a salesman. The influence of terror management on product preferences, Journal of Economic and Financial Studies 3(5): 33-42.

2013

  • Lai J. & Poletiek F.H. (2013), How "small" is "starting small" for learning hierarchical centre-embedded structures?, Journal of Cognitive Psychology 25(4): 423-435.

2012

  • Poletiek F.H. & Lai J. (2012), How semantic biases in simple adjacencies affect learning a complex structure with non-adjacencies in AGL: A statistical account, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 367(1598 SI): 2046-2054.

2011

  • Poletiek, F. H. (2011). What in the world makes recursion so easy to learn? A statistical account of the staged input effect on learning a centre embedded hierarchical structure in AGL. Biolinguistics, 5, 1-2, 36-42.
  • Poletiek, F.H. (2011). You cannot have your hypothesis and test it. The importance of utilities in theories on reasoning. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(2), 87-88.
  • Lai, J. & Poletiek, F. H. (2011). The Impact of Adjacent-Dependencies and Staged-Input on the Learnability of Center-Embedded Hierarchical Structures. Cognition, 118(2), 265-273

2010

  • Lai, J. & Poletiek, F. H. (2010).The impact of starting small on the learnability of recursion. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp.1387-1392.
  • Van den Bos, E. J., & Poletiek, F.H. (2010). Structural Selection in Implicit Learning of Artificial Grammars. Psychological Research, 74, 138-151.

2009

  • Poletiek, F.H., & Van Schijndel, T.J.P. (2009) Stimulus Set Size and Grammar Coverage in Artificial Grammar Learning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 16(6), 1058-1064.
  • Poletiek, F.H. (2009). Popper's Severity of Test as an Intuitive Probabilistic Model of Hypothesis Testing. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 99-100.
  • Poletiek, F. H., & Wolters, G. (2009). What is learned about fragments in Artificial Grammar Learning. A transitional probabilities approach. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(5), 868-876 .

2008

  • Van den Bos, E. J., & Poletiek, F.H. (2008). Effects of grammar complexity on Artificial Grammar Learning. Memory & Cognition, 36(6), 1122-1131.
  • Van den Bos E.J., & Poletiek, F.H.. (2008). Intentional artificial grammar learning: When does it work? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 20, 793-806.
  • Poletiek, F.H., Conway, C.M., Ellefson, M.R., & Christiansen, M.H. (under revision). When Less is Less and When Less is More: A statistical learning account of the facilitation of staged input in learning a self referring structure.

2006

  • Poletiek, F. H., & Chater, N. (2006). Grammar induction benefits from representative sampling. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp.1968-1973.
  • Poletiek, F.H. (2006). Representative sampling in an artificial grammar learning task. In P.Juslin, & K.Fiedler (Eds). Information sampling and adaptive cognition (pp. 440-455). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Poletiek, F.H., & Chater, N. (2006). Grammar induction benefits from representative stimulus sampling. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp.1968-1973).
  • Van den Bos, E., & Poletiek, F.H. (2006). Implicit artificial grammar learning in adults and children. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p.2619)

Share us