1. Plaut, D. C. (2008). Settling dynamics in distributed networks explain task differences in semantic ambiguity effects: Computational and behavioral evidence. In B. C. Love, K. McRae, & V. M. Sloutsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 273–278). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
2. Armstrong, B. C., & Plaut, D. C. (2011). Inducing homonymy effects via stimulus quality and (not) nonword difficulty: Implications for models of semantic ambiguity and word recognition. In L. Carlson, C. Hölscher, & T. F. Shipley (Eds.), Expanding the space of cognitive science: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2223–2228). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
3. Armstrong, B. C., Tokowicz, N., & Plaut, D. C. (2012a). eDom: Norming software and relative meaning frequencies for 544 English homonyms. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 1015–1027. doi: 10.3758/s13428-012-0199-8
4. Armstrong, B. C., Watson, C. E., & Plaut, D. C. (2012b). SOS! An algorithm and software for the stochastic optimization of stimuli. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 675–705. doi: 10.3758/s13428-011-0182-9
5. Azuma, T., & Van Orden, G. C. (1997). Why SAFE is better than FAST: The relatedness of a word’s meanings affects lexical decision times. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 484–504. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1997.2502