Suppr超能文献

语音典型性不影响正常阅读中的注视时长。

Phonological typicality does not influence fixation durations in normal reading.

作者信息

Staub Adrian, Grant Margaret, Clifton Charles, Rayner Keith

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts, amherst, MA 01003, USA.

出版信息

J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009 May;35(3):806-14. doi: 10.1037/a0015123.

Abstract

Using a word-by-word self-paced reading paradigm, T. A. Farmer, M. H. Christiansen, and P. Monaghan (2006) reported faster reading times for words that are phonologically typical for their syntactic category (i.e., noun or verb) than for words that are phonologically atypical. This result has been taken to suggest that language users are sensitive to subtle relationships between sound and syntactic function and that they make rapid use of this information in comprehension. The present article reports attempts to replicate this result using both eyetracking during normal reading (Experiment 1) and word-by-word self-paced reading (Experiment 2). No hint of a phonological typicality effect emerged on any reading-time measure in Experiment 1, nor did Experiment 2 replicate Farmer et al.'s finding from self-paced reading. Indeed, the differences between condition means were not consistently in the predicted direction, as phonologically atypical verbs were read more quickly than phonologically typical verbs, on most measures. Implications for research on visual word recognition are discussed.

摘要

T. A. 法默、M. H. 克里斯蒂安森和P. 莫纳汉(2006年)采用逐词自定步速阅读范式,报告称,对于在语音上与其句法类别(即名词或动词)相符的单词,其阅读速度要快于语音上不相符的单词。这一结果表明,语言使用者对语音和句法功能之间的微妙关系很敏感,并且在理解过程中会迅速利用这些信息。本文报告了分别使用正常阅读时的眼动追踪技术(实验1)和逐词自定步速阅读技术(实验2)来重复这一结果的尝试。在实验1的任何阅读时间测量中,均未出现语音典型性效应的迹象,实验2也未重复法默等人在自定步速阅读中的发现。事实上,条件均值之间的差异并不始终符合预测的方向,在大多数测量中,语音上不典型的动词比语音上典型的动词阅读速度更快。文中讨论了对视觉单词识别研究的启示。

相似文献

1
Phonological typicality does not influence fixation durations in normal reading.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009 May;35(3):806-14. doi: 10.1037/a0015123.
4
Phonological typicality and sentence processing.
Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Mar;11(3):93-5. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.010. Epub 2007 Jan 4.
5
The effect of phonological neighborhood density on eye movements during reading.
Cognition. 2008 May;107(2):685-92. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.07.020. Epub 2007 Sep 10.
6
Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: evidence from eye movements and word-by-word self-paced reading.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1990 Jul;16(4):555-68. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.16.4.555.
7
Processing modifier-head agreement in reading: evidence for a delayed effect of agreement.
Mem Cognit. 2008 Mar;36(2):329-40. doi: 10.3758/mc.36.2.329.
8
The word grouping hypothesis and eye movements during reading.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Nov;34(6):1552-60. doi: 10.1037/a0013017.
9
Evidence for simultaneous syntactic processing of multiple words during reading.
PLoS One. 2017 Mar 9;12(3):e0173720. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173720. eCollection 2017.
10
Phonological typicality influences on-line sentence comprehension.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Aug 8;103(32):12203-8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0602173103. Epub 2006 Aug 1.

引用本文的文献

1
The Myth of Normal Reading.
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2023 Jul;18(4):863-870. doi: 10.1177/17456916221127226. Epub 2022 Nov 10.
2
(Early) context effects on event-related potentials over natural inputs.
Lang Cogn Neurosci. 2020;35(5):658-679. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2019.1597979. Epub 2019 Mar 30.
3
Effects of Lexical Variables on Silent Reading Comprehension in Individuals With Aphasia: Evidence From Eye Tracking.
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017 Sep 18;60(9):2589-2602. doi: 10.1044/2017_JSLHR-L-16-0045.
4
The Specificity of Sound Symbolic Correspondences in Spoken Language.
Cogn Sci. 2017 Nov;41(8):2191-2220. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12474. Epub 2016 Dec 29.
5
Form-to-expectation matching effects on first-pass eye movement measures during reading.
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2015 Aug;41(4):958-76. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000054. Epub 2015 Apr 27.
6
Hyper-active gap filling.
Front Psychol. 2015 Apr 10;6:384. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00384. eCollection 2015.
7
Multi-voxel pattern analysis of noun and verb differences in ventral temporal cortex.
Brain Lang. 2014 Oct;137:40-9. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2014.07.009. Epub 2014 Aug 24.
8
Rapid Expectation Adaptation during Syntactic Comprehension.
PLoS One. 2013 Oct 30;8(10):e77661. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0077661. eCollection 2013.

本文引用的文献

1
Categorical Data Analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards Logit Mixed Models.
J Mem Lang. 2008 Nov;59(4):434-446. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007.
2
Eye movement control during reading: Effects of word frequency and orthographic familiarity.
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2008 Feb;34(1):205-23. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.34.1.205.
3
Expectation-based syntactic comprehension.
Cognition. 2008 Mar;106(3):1126-77. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.006. Epub 2007 Jul 30.
4
Phonological typicality and sentence processing.
Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Mar;11(3):93-5. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.010. Epub 2007 Jan 4.
5
Phonological typicality influences on-line sentence comprehension.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Aug 8;103(32):12203-8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0602173103. Epub 2006 Aug 1.
6
The role of structural prediction in rapid syntactic analysis.
Brain Lang. 2006 Jul;98(1):74-88. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2006.02.003. Epub 2006 Apr 18.
7
Syntactic prediction in language comprehension: evidence from either...or.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2006 Mar;32(2):425-36. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.32.2.425.
8
Eye movements and word skipping during reading revisited.
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2005 Oct;31(5):954-9. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.31.5.954.
9
SWIFT: a dynamical model of saccade generation during reading.
Psychol Rev. 2005 Oct;112(4):777-813. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.777.
10
The influence of phonological neighborhood on visual word perception.
Psychon Bull Rev. 2004 Jun;11(3):452-7. doi: 10.3758/bf03196594.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验