Publications

* Indicates that the first author is (or was) a student or postdoc in my laboratory when the work was
completed. Author order reflects conventions in cognitive psychology and psycholinguistics: the 1st
author is the student/postdoc and the final author is the advisor/lab director.

Long, B., Simson, J., Buxó-Lugo, A., Watson, D.G., Mehr, S.A. (2023). Commentary: How games can make behavioural science better. Nature.

James, A. N., Minnihan, C. J., & Watson, D. G. (2023). Language Experience Predicts Eye Movements During Online Auditory Comprehension. Journal of cognition, 6(1), 30. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.285

Harrington Stack, C.; Watson, D.G. Pauses and Parsing: Testing the Role of Prosodic Chunking in Sentence Processing. Languages (2023), 8, 157. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages8030157

Buz, E., Dwyer, N. C., Lai, W., Watson, D. G., & Gifford, R. H. (2023). Integration of fundamental frequency and voice-onset-time to voicing categorization: Listeners with normal hearing and bimodal hearing configurations. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 153(3), 1580. https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017429

Wright, A.M., Carter, K.E., Bibyk, S.A., Jaeger, C.B., Watson, D.G., &Levin, D.T. (2022). Video speeding can be efficient and speeding-induced preference cost can be lessened by selective speeding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied.

Lee, E-K., Lam, T.Q., & Watson, D.G (2021) The Contribution of Form Repetition to Listeners’
Expectation of Givenness in Online Reference Resolution, Discourse Processes, 58:9, 820-
836,DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2021.1954831

*Myers, B. R., & Watson, D. G. (2021). Evidence of Absence: Abstract Metrical Structure in
Speech Planning. Cognitive Science, 45(8), e13017. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.13017

*Tippenhauer, N., Fourakis, E. R., Watson, D. G., & Lew-Williams, C. (2020). The scope of
audience design in child-directed speech: Parents’ tailoring of word lengths for adult versus child
listeners. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46, 2163-2178.

Co, S-J., Watson, D.G., Jacobs, C.L., & Naveiras, M. (2020). A Markov mixed-effect multinomial
logistic regression model for nominal repeated measures: An analysis on syntactic self-priming
effects. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 56, 476-495. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2020.1738207

* Buxó-Lugo, A., Jacobs, C. L., & Watson, D. G. (2020). The world is not enough to explain
lengthening of phonological competitors. Journal of Memory and Language, 110, Article 104066,
110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2019.104066

*Kimball, A.E., Yiu, L.K., & Watson, D.G. (2019) Word recall is affected by surrounding metrical
context. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 35, 383-392. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1665190

Watson, D. G., Jacobs, C. L., Buxó-Lugo, A. (2019). Prosody indexes both competence
and performance. WIREs Cognitive Science. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1522

*Jacobs, C. L., Loucks, T., Watson, D. G., & Dell, G. S. (2019). Masking auditory feedback does
not eliminate repetition reduction. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 35, 485-497.

*Myers, B.R. & Watson, D.G. (2019) Paying the meter: Effect of metrical similarity on word
lengthening, Psychomic Bulletin & Review, 26, 1941-1947. doi: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-
01635-4.

*Jacobs, C. L. , Cho, S-J, & Watson, D.G. (2019) Comprehension input leads to syntactic priming
in production but speakers do not prime themselves, Cognitive Science, 43, doi: 10.1111/cogs.12749.

*Harrington-Stack, C., James, A. N., & Watson, D.G. (2018) A failure to replicate rapid syntactic
adaptation in comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 46, 864-877.

*James, A.N., Fraundorf, S. H., Lee, E-K, & Watson, D.G. (2018) Individual differences in
syntactic processing: Is there evidence for reader-text interactions? Journal of Memory and
Language, 102, 155-181.

*Tooley, K.M., Konopka, A.E., & Watson, D.G. (2018). Assessing priming for prosodic
representations: Speaking rate, intonational phrase boundaries, and pitch accenting. Memory &
Cognition, 46, 625-641.

*Buxo-Lugo, A., Toscano, J., & Watson, D.G. (2016). Effects of participant engagement on
prosodic prominence. Discourse Processes, DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2016.1240742

*Buxo-Lugo, A. & Watson, D.G. (2016). Evidence for the influence of syntax on prosodic parsing.
Journal of Memory and Language, 90, 1-13.

*Jacobs, C.L, Yiu, L.K., Watson, D.G., & Dell, G.S. (2015) Why are repeated words produced with
reduced durations? Evidence from inner speech and homophone production. Journal of Memory and
Language, 84, 37-48.

*Yiu, L.K. & Watson, D.G. (2015). When overlap leads to competition: Effects of phonological
encoding on word duration. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 22, 1701-1708.

*Lewis, M.L. & Watson, D.G. (2015) Effects of lexical semantics on acoustic
prominence. Language and Cognition, 7, 1-21.

*Fraundorf, S.H., Watson, D.G., & Benjamin, A.S. (2015). Reduction in prosodic prominence
predicts speakers' recall: Implications for theories of prosody. Language, Cognition, and
Neuroscience, 30, 606-619.

Arnold, J.E. & Watson, D.G. (2015). Synthesizing meaning and processing approaches to prosody:
Performance matters. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 30, 88-102.

*Fraundorf, S.M. & Watson, D.G. (2014). Alice’s adventures in Um-derland: Psycholinguistic
dimensions of variation in disfluency production. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 29, 1083-
1096.

*Gillespie, M., James, A.N., Federmeier, K.D., & Watson, D.G. (2014). Verbal working memory
predicts co-speech gesture: Evidence from individual differences. Cognition, 132, 174-180.

*Lam, T. Q. & Watson, D.G. (2014) Repetition Reduction: Lexical repetition in the absence of
referent repetition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 40, 829-
843.

*Tooley, K.M., Konopka, A.E., & Watson, D.G. (2014). Can intonational phrase structure be
primed (like syntactic structure)? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory &
Cognition, 40, 348-363.

*Lee, E-K., Brown-Schmidt, S., & Watson, D.G. (2013). Ways of looking ahead: Incrementality in
language production. Cognition, 129, 544-562.

*Fraundorf, S. H., Benjamin, A.S., & Watson, D.G. (2013). What happened (and what didn’t): Font
emphasis promotes representation of salient alternatives in discourse. Journal of Memory and
Language, 69, 196-227.

*Fraundorf, S. H., Watson, D. G., & Benjamin, A. S. (2012). The effects of age on the strategic use
of pitch accents in memory for discourse: A process-resource account. Psychology and Aging, 27,
88-98.

Breen, M., Watson, D. G., & Gibson, E. (2011). Intonational phrasing is constrained by meaning,
not balance. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26 (10), 1532-1562.

*Fraundorf, S. H., & Watson, D. G. (2011). The disfluent discourse: Effects of filled pauses on
recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 161-175.

*Lee, E.-K. & Watson, D. G. (2011). Effects of pitch accents in attachment ambiguity resolution.
Language and Cognitive Processes, 26, 262-297.

*Fraundorf, S. H., Watson, D. G., & Benjamin, A. S. (2010). Recognition memory reveals just how
CONTRASTIVE contrastive accenting really is. Journal of Memory and Language, 63, 367-386.

*Isaacs, A. M. & Watson, D. G. (2010). Accent detection is a slippery slope: Direction and rate of
F0 change drives comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25, 1178-1200.

*Lam, T. Q. & Watson, D. G. (2010). Repetition is easy: Why repeated referents have reduced
prominence. Memory & Cognition, 38, 1137-1146.

Wagner, M. & Watson, D. G. (2010). Experimental and theoretical advances in prosody: A review.
Language and Cognitive Processes, 25, 905-945.

Diehl, J. J., Watson, D. G., Bennetto, L., McDonough, J., Young, E. C., & Gunlogson, C. (2008).
An acoustic analysis of prosody in high functioning autism. Applied Psycholinguistics, 30, 1-20.

Diehl, J., Bennetto, L., Watson, D., Gunlogson, C., & McDonough, J. (2008). Resolving ambiguity:
A psycholinguistic approach to understanding prosody processing in high-functioning autism. Brain
& Language, 106, 144-152.

Wonnacott, E. & Watson, D. (2008). Acoustic emphasis in four year olds. Cognition, 107,1093-
1101.

Watson, D., Gunlogson, C., & Tanenhaus, M. (2008). Interpreting pitch accents in on-line
comprehension: H* vs L+H*. Cognitive Science, 32, 1232-1244.

Watson, D., Arnold, J.A., & Tanenhaus, M.K. (2008) Tic Tac TOE: Effects of predictability and
importance on acoustic prominence in language production. Cognition, 106, 1548-1557.

Watson, D., Breen, M., & Gibson, E.A. (2006) The role of syntactic obligatoriness in the production
of intonational boundaries. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition,
32, 1045-1056.

Gibson, E., Desmet, T., Grodner, D., Watson, D. & Ko, K., (2005) Reading relative clauses in
English. Cognitive Linguistics, 16 ,315-353.

Grodner, D. J., Gibson, E., & Watson, D. (2005) The influence of contextual contrast on syntactic
processing: Evidence for strong-interaction in sentence comprehension. Cognition, 95, 275-296.

Watson, D. & Gibson, E. (2005) Intonational Phrasing and Constituency in Language Production
and Comprehension. Studia Linguistica, 59, 279-300

Watson, D. & Gibson, E. (2004) The relationship between intonational phrasing and syntactic
structure in language production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 713-755.

Watson, D. & Gibson, E. (2004) Making Sense of the Sense Unit Condition, Linguistic Inquiry, 35,
508-517.