Department of Psychology, Social Science Centre, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada, N6A 5C2.
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2013 Feb;142(1):282-7. doi: 10.1037/a0027004.
Kousta, Vigliocco, Del Campo, Vinson, and Andrews (2011) questioned the adequacy of dual coding theory and the context availability model as explanations of representational and processing differences between concrete and abstract words. They proposed an alternative approach that focuses on the role of emotional content in the processing of abstract concepts. Their dual coding critique is, however, based on impoverished and, in some respects, incorrect interpretations of the theory and its implications. This response corrects those gaps and misinterpretations and summarizes research findings that show predicted variations in the effects of dual coding variables in different tasks and contexts. Especially emphasized is an empirically supported dual coding theory of emotion that goes beyond the Kousta et al. emphasis on emotion in abstract semantics.
库斯塔、维利科科、德尔坎波、文森和安德鲁斯(2011 年)质疑双重编码理论和语境可用性模型作为对具体词和抽象词之间的表示和处理差异的解释的充分性。他们提出了一种替代方法,重点关注情感内容在抽象概念处理中的作用。然而,他们的双重编码批判是基于对该理论及其含义的贫瘠和在某些方面的错误解释。本回应纠正了这些差距和误解,并总结了研究结果,这些结果表明在不同任务和语境中,双重编码变量的影响存在预期变化。特别强调的是一种经过实证支持的情感双重编码理论,该理论超越了库斯塔等人对抽象语义中情感的强调。