Warren Tessa, McConnell Kerry
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Psychon Bull Rev. 2007 Aug;14(4):770-5. doi: 10.3758/bf03196835.
This paper presents a study investigating whether and how different kinds of knowledge affect the detection of plausibility and possibility violations. Readers' eye-movements were monitored while reading sentences describing impossible events cued by selectional restriction violations, extremely implausible events without selectional restriction violations, and plausible events, in order to determine whether the time course of disruption is determined by overall implausibility/unlikelihood, or whether impossibility cued by selectional restriction violations additionally affects disruption. Both early and late fixation measures showed stronger disruption in the impossible/selectional restriction violation condition. However, measures indexing regressive eye-movements showed similar disruption in both extremely implausible conditions. This suggests that the magnitude and latency of disruption to possibility and plausibility violations is not a simple function of the overall implausibility/unlikelihood of the resulting event, but that selectional restriction violations influence the early and late time course of disruption.
本文呈现了一项研究,探究不同类型的知识是否以及如何影响对合理性和可能性违背情况的察觉。在读者阅读描述由选择限制违背所提示的不可能事件、无选择限制违背的极不合理事件以及合理事件的句子时,对他们的眼动进行监测,以确定干扰的时间进程是由总体的不合理性/不可能性决定,还是由选择限制违背所提示的不可能性额外影响干扰。早期和晚期注视测量均显示在不可能/选择限制违背条件下干扰更强。然而,指示回退眼动的测量在两种极不合理条件下显示出相似的干扰。这表明对可能性和合理性违背的干扰程度及延迟并非所产生事件总体不合理性/不可能性的简单函数,而是选择限制违背会影响干扰的早期和晚期时间进程。