Artificial Intelligence and Psycholinguistics: How Do Large Language Models Represent Human Language Processes? A Systematic Review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35870/ljit.v4i2.8346Keywords:
artificial intelligence, psycholinguistics, large language models, language processing, cognitive science, computational linguisticsAbstract
The rapid development of large language models (LLMs) has fundamentally transformed contemporary perspectives on language representation and processing. Models such as GPT, Gemini, Claude, Llama, and DeepSeek demonstrate remarkable capabilities in language comprehension, generation, translation, summarization, and reasoning, raising important questions regarding their relationship to human language processing. While psycholinguistic theories traditionally explain language through cognitive mechanisms involving perception, memory, attention, semantic representation, and executive control, LLMs rely on statistical learning, neural network architectures, and large-scale pattern recognition. The present study synthesizes contemporary research examining the similarities and differences between human language processing and LLM-based language representation. Employing a qualitative systematic review, the study integrates empirical findings published between 2018 and 2025 from psycholinguistics, cognitive science, neuroscience, computational linguistics, and artificial intelligence. The findings indicate that LLMs successfully approximate numerous observable characteristics of human language behavior, including syntactic processing, contextual prediction, semantic association, discourse coherence, and pragmatic inference. However, important differences remain regarding grounding, intentionality, episodic memory, emotional experience, and embodied cognition. Although LLMs provide valuable computational models for investigating psycholinguistic theories, they cannot currently be considered cognitive equivalents of human language users. Instead, they represent sophisticated probabilistic systems that emulate linguistic behavior without reproducing the complete cognitive architecture underlying human communication. The review discusses theoretical implications for psycholinguistics, cognitive science, and artificial intelligence while identifying future research directions for integrating computational and cognitive approaches to language.
Downloads
References
Baddeley, A. D. (2012). Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100422
Barrett, L. F. (2017). How emotions are made: The secret life of the brain. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639
Bender, E. M., & Koller, A. (2020). Climbing towards NLU: On meaning, form, and understanding in the age of data. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 5185–5198). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.463
Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 610–623). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922
Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., ... Amodei, D. (2020). Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33, 1877–1901. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2005.14165
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press.
Citron, F. M. M. (2012). Neural correlates of written emotion word processing. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6(3), 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2011.12.007
Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(3), 181–204. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x12000477
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge University Press.
Clark, K., Khandelwal, U., Levy, O., & Manning, C. D. (2019). What does BERT look at? An analysis of BERT's attention. In Proceedings of the 2019 Workshop on BlackboxNLP: Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP (pp. 276–286). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W19-4828
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019). BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (pp. 4171–4186). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/N19-1423
Elman, J. L. (1990). Finding structure in time. Cognitive Science, 14(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(90)90002-E
Fedorenko, E., Blank, I., Siegelman, M., & Mineroff, Z. (2020). Lack of selectivity for syntax relative to word meanings throughout the language network. Cognition, 203, 104348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104348
Frank, S. L., Bod, R., & Christiansen, M. H. (2012). How hierarchical is language use? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 279(1747), 4522–4531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104348
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press.
Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., & Courville, A. (2016). Deep learning. MIT Press.
Hasson, U., Nastase, S. A., & Goldstein, A. (2020). Direct fit to nature: An evolutionary perspective on biological and artificial neural networks. Neuron, 105(3), 416–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2019.12.002
Jurafsky, D., & Martin, J. H. (2025). Speech and language processing (3rd ed., draft). Pearson.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Lake, B. M., Ullman, T. D., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Gershman, S. J. (2017). Building machines that learn and think like people. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e253. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x16001837
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago Press.
Levelt, W. J. M. (1999). Models of word production. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(6), 223–232.
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. https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00115
Mahowald, K., Ivanova, A., Blank, I., Kanwisher, N., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Fedorenko, E. (2024). Dissociating language and thought in large language models. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2024.01.011
Manning, C. D., Clark, K., Hewitt, J., Khandelwal, U., & Levy, O. (2020). Emergent linguistic structure in artificial neural networks trained by self-supervision. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(48), 30046–30054. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1907367117
Mikolov, T., Chen, K., Corrado, G., & Dean, J. (2013). Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR).
OpenAI. (2023). GPT-4 technical report. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.08774
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71.
Piantadosi, S. T. (2023). Modern language models refute Chomsky's approach to language. LingBuzz.
Pickering, M. J., & Gambi, C. (2018). Predicting while comprehending language. Psychological Bulletin, 144(10), 1002–1044. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000158
Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 13, 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ne.13.030190.000325
Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J. L., & PDP Research Group. (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition (Vols. 1–2). MIT Press.
Schrimpf, M., Blank, I., Tuckute, G., Kauf, C., Hosseini, E., Kanwisher, N., ... Fedorenko, E. (2021). The neural architecture of language: Integrative modeling converges on predictive processing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(45), e2105646118.
Searle, J. R. (1980). Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(3), 417–457. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00005756
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Harvard University Press.
Traxler, M. J. (2014). Introduction to psycholinguistics: Understanding language science (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., ... Polosukhin, I. (2017). Attention is all you need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30, 5998–6008.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Astuty Astuty
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Copyright Retention and Open Access License
Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the journal non-exclusive right of first publication under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
This license allows unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
2. Rights Granted Under CC BY 4.0
Under this license, readers are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercial use
- No additional restrictions — the licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as license terms are followed
3. Attribution Requirements
All uses must include:
- Proper citation of the original work
- Link to the Creative Commons license
- Indication if changes were made to the original work
- No suggestion that the licensor endorses the user or their use
4. Additional Distribution Rights
Authors may:
- Deposit the published version in institutional repositories
- Share through academic social networks
- Include in books, monographs, or other publications
- Post on personal or institutional websites
Requirement: All additional distributions must maintain the CC BY 4.0 license and proper attribution.
5. Self-Archiving and Pre-Print Sharing
Authors are encouraged to:
- Share pre-prints and post-prints online
- Deposit in subject-specific repositories (e.g., arXiv, bioRxiv)
- Engage in scholarly communication throughout the publication process
6. Open Access Commitment
This journal provides immediate open access to all content, supporting the global exchange of knowledge without financial, legal, or technical barriers.
