University of Cincinnati, 45221, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Mem Cognit. 1975 Jul;3(4):409-15. doi: 10.3758/BF03212934.
The idea that people can encode and use an extremely abstract and general form of a complex linguistic (proverb) input-a conceptual base-was examined in two experiments. In Experiment I, each proverb was accompanied by either a conceptually related (good, mediocre, or poor) or an unrelated interpretation. The related interpretations were more effective recall prompts than were the unrelated interpretations, but only for high-imagery proverbs. In Experiment II, subjects wrote interpretations of the proverbs and then received either the proverb subject-noun or a brief story as a prompt. As was the case for the interpretations in Experiment I, the stories did not share any major vocabulary or propositional structure with their proverb source. Nonetheless, the stories were as effective as the nouns. Also, quality of proverb interpretation and of recall performance were positively related, with the correlations involving low-imagery proverbs, and stories, tending to be higher. Both experiments provided support for the conceptual-base notion, and underlined the importance of interpretive context, but more definitive evidence is needed.
两项实验检验了人们能否对复杂语言(谚语)输入进行编码并加以运用,这种输入形式极其抽象且具有概括性——概念基础。在实验一中,每条谚语都有一个与之相关(好、中、差)或不相关的解释。相关解释比不相关解释更能有效地提示回忆,但只针对高意象的谚语。在实验二中,被试先写出对谚语的解释,然后收到谚语的主语名词或一个简短故事作为提示。与实验一中的解释一样,故事与谚语来源没有任何主要词汇或命题结构共享。尽管如此,故事和名词一样有效。此外,谚语解释的质量和回忆表现呈正相关,与低意象的谚语和故事相关的相关性更高。这两个实验都为概念基础的观点提供了支持,强调了解释语境的重要性,但还需要更确凿的证据。