Department of Psychology, Neuroscience & Behaviour, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Cognition. 2010 Nov;117(2):151-65. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.08.006.
Three experiments elicited phonological speech errors using the SLIP procedure to investigate whether there is a tendency for speech errors on specific words to reoccur, and whether this effect can be attributed to implicit learning of an incorrect mapping from lemma to phonology for that word. In Experiment 1, when speakers made a phonological speech error in the study phase of the experiment (e.g. saying "beg pet" in place of "peg bet") they were over four times as likely to make an error on that same item several minutes later at test. A pseudo-error condition demonstrated that the effect is not simply due to a propensity for speakers to repeat phonological forms, regardless of whether or not they have been made in error. That is, saying "beg pet" correctly at study did not induce speakers to say "beg pet" in error instead of "peg bet" at test. Instead, the effect appeared to be due to learning of the error pathway. Experiment 2 replicated this finding, but also showed that after 48 h, errors made at study were no longer more likely to reoccur. As well as providing constraints on the longevity of the effect, this provides strong evidence that the error reoccurrences observed are not due to item-specific difficulty that leads individual speakers to make habitual mistakes on certain items. Experiment 3 showed that the diminishment of the effect 48 h later is not due to specific extra practice at the task. We discuss how these results fit in with a larger view of language as a dynamic system that is constantly adapting in response to experience.
三个实验通过 SLIP 程序引出语音言语错误，以调查言语错误是否倾向于特定单词重复出现，以及这种效应是否可以归因于该单词从词干到语音的不正确映射的内隐学习。在实验 1 中，当说话者在实验的学习阶段犯了语音言语错误（例如，说“beg pet”代替“peg bet”）时，他们在测试中几分钟后再次犯同样错误的可能性高出四倍。伪错误条件表明，这种效应不是简单地由于说话者重复语音形式的倾向，而不管他们是否犯了错误。也就是说，在学习时正确地说“beg pet”不会导致说话者在测试中错误地说“beg pet”而不是“peg bet”。相反，这种效应似乎是由于错误途径的学习。实验 2 复制了这一发现，但也表明，在 48 小时后，在学习中犯的错误不再更有可能再次出现。除了对效应的持续时间施加限制外，这也提供了有力的证据，表明观察到的错误再次出现不是由于特定项目的难度导致个别说话者对某些项目习惯性地犯错。实验 3 表明，48 小时后效应的减弱并不是由于任务中特定的额外练习。我们讨论了这些结果如何与语言作为一个动态系统的更广泛观点相适应，该系统不断适应经验的变化。
