Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-kn6lq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-15T15:29:50.242Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Beyond the limitations of any imaginable mechanism: Large language models and psycholinguistics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 December 2023

Conor Houghton Open the ORCID record for Conor Houghton [Opens in a new window] ,
Nina Kazanina Open the ORCID record for Nina Kazanina [Opens in a new window]  and
Priyanka Sukumaran Open the ORCID record for Priyanka Sukumaran [Opens in a new window]
Conor Houghton
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK conor.houghton@bristol.ac.uk p.sukumaran@bristol.ac.uk conorhoughton.github.io
Nina Kazanina
Affiliation:
School of Psychological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK nina.kazanina@bristol.ac.uk International Laboratory of Social Neurobiology, Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience, National Research University, Higher School of Economics, HSE University, Moscow, Russia
Priyanka Sukumaran
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK conor.houghton@bristol.ac.uk p.sukumaran@bristol.ac.uk conorhoughton.github.io School of Psychological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK nina.kazanina@bristol.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) are not detailed models of human linguistic processing. They are, however, extremely successful at their primary task: Providing a model for language. For this reason LLMs are important in psycholinguistics: They are useful as a practical tool, as an illustrative comparative, and philosophically, as a basis for recasting the relationship between language and thought.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 46 , 2023 , e395
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bernardy, J.-P., & Lappin, S. (2017). Using deep neural networks to learn syntactic agreement. Linguistic Issues in Language Technology, 15(2), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J. D., Dhariwal, P., … Amodei, D. (2020). Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33, 1877–1901.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1966). Cartesian linguistics: A chapter in the history of rationalist thought. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dambacher, M., Kliegl, R., Hofmann, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (2006). Frequency and predictability effects on event-related potentials during reading. Brain Research, 1084(1), 89–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2018). BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In Burstein, J., Doran, C., & Solorio, T. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. (pp. 4171–4186). https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.04805Google Scholar
Fischler, I., & Bloom, P. A. (1979). Automatic and attentional processes in the effects of sentence contexts on word recognition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(1), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, S. L., Otten, L. J., Galli, G., & Vigliocco, G. (2015). The ERP response to the amount of information conveyed by words in sentences. Brain and Language, 140, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gulordava, K., Bojanowski, P., Grave, E., Linzen, T., & Baroni, M. (2018). Colorless green recurrent networks dream hierarchically. In Walker, M., Ji, H., & Stent, A. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (pp. 1195–2205). https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.11138.pdfGoogle Scholar
Kleiman, G. M. (1980). Sentence frame contexts and lexical decisions: Sentence-acceptability and word- relatedness effects. Memory & Cognition, 8(4), 336–344.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuncoro, A., Dyer, C., Hale, J., & Blunsom, P. (2018). The perils of natural behaviour tests for unnatural models: The case of number agreement. Poster presented at learning language in humans and in machines, Paris, France, July, 5(6). Organizers: Susan Goldin-Meadow, Afra Alishahi, Phil Blunsom, Cynthia Fisher, Chen Yu & Michael Frank.Google Scholar
Landau, B., Smith, L. B., & Jones, S. S. (1988). The importance of shape in early lexical learning. Cognitive Development, 3(3), 299–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linzen, T., Dupoux, E., & Goldberg, Y. (2016). Assessing the ability of LSTMs to learn syntax-sensitive dependencies. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 4, 521–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linzen, T., & Leonard, B. (2018). Distinct patterns of syntactic agreement errors in recurrent networks and humans. In Kalish, C., Rau, M. A., Zhu, X. (J.), & Rogers, T. T. (Eds.), Proceedings of CogSci 2018 (pp. 692–697).Google Scholar
Marvin, R., & Linzen, T. (2018). Targeted syntactic evaluation of language models. In Riloff, E., Chiang, D., Hockenmaier, J., & Tsujii, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 1192–1202).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, J., Kazanina, N., Houghton, C., & Bowers, J. (2019). Do LSTMs know about Principle C?. In Nienborg, H., Poldrack, R., & Naselaris, T. (Eds.), Conference on Cognitive Computational Neuroscience, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.32470/CCN.2019.1241-0Google Scholar
Rayner, K., & Well, A. D. (1996). Effects of contextual constraint on eye movements in reading: A further examination. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3(4), 504–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sukumaran, P., Houghton, C., & Kazanina, N. (2022). Do LSTMs see gender? Probing the ability of LSTMs to learn abstract syntactic rules. In Bastings, J., Belinkov, Y., Elazar, Y., Hupkes, D., Saphr, N., & Wiegreffe, S. (Eds.), Poster at BlackboxNLP 2022. https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.00153Google Scholar
Turing, A. M. (1950). Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind; A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy, 49, 433–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar