Quantifiers and verification strategies: Connecting the dots

In this paper, we replicate the influential study of Hackl (2009), making more specificalgorithmic-level predictions based on Hackl's findings. Hackl argued that two semanticallyequivalent quantifiers more than half and most are associated with different verificationstrategies. The results of our experiment diverge in several respects from the originalstudy. We explain the results by focusing on two potential confounds in Hackl's 2009experimental set-up: different roles that working memory can play in the verificationof different quantifiers and individual differences suggesting the use of various cognitivestrategies.