University of Delaware.
J Cogn Neurosci. 1997 Nov;9(6):776-87. doi: 10.1162/jocn.1997.9.6.776.
Readers routinely draw inferences with remarkable efficiency and seemingly little cognitive effort. The present study was designed to explore different types of inferences during the course of reading, and the potential effects of differing levels of working memory capacity on the likelihood that inferences would be made. The electroencephalogram (EEG) was recorded from five scalp sites while participants read 90 paragraphs, composed of 60 experimental paragraphs and 30 filler paragraphs. Each experimental paragraph was four sentences long, and the final sentence stated explicitly the inference that readers did or did not make. There were four types of experimental paragraphs: (1) Bridging inference, (2) Elaborative inference, (3) Word-Based Priming control, and (4) No Inference control. Participants were tested using the Daneman and Carpenter (1980) Reading Span Task and categorized as having low or high working memory capacity. The average peaks of the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (EM) were used as a measure of semantic priming and integration, such that the lower the N400 was in response to the explicitly stated inference concept, the more likely it was that the reader made the inference. Results indicate that readers with high working memory capacity made both bridging (necessary) and elaborative (optional) inferences during reading, whereas readers with low working memory capacity made only bridging inferences during reading. We interpret the findings within the framework of the Capacity Constrained Comprehension model of Just and Carpenter (1992).
读者通常能够高效地进行推理,而且似乎不需要太多认知努力。本研究旨在探索阅读过程中的不同类型推理,以及不同工作记忆容量水平对推理可能性的潜在影响。在 5 个头皮部位记录了参与者阅读 90 个段落时的脑电图(EEG),其中 60 个是实验段落,30 个是填充段落。每个实验段落由四句话组成,最后一句话明确陈述了读者做出或未做出的推理。实验段落有四种类型:(1)桥接推理,(2)详尽推理,(3)基于单词的启动控制,以及(4)无推理控制。参与者使用 Daneman 和 Carpenter(1980)阅读广度任务进行测试,并根据工作记忆容量分为低或高工作记忆容量。事件相关脑电位(ERP)的 N400 成分的平均峰值被用作语义启动和整合的度量,即响应明确陈述的推理概念的 N400 越低,读者做出推理的可能性就越大。结果表明,高工作记忆容量的读者在阅读过程中既做出了桥接(必要)推理,也做出了详尽(可选)推理,而低工作记忆容量的读者在阅读过程中只做出了桥接推理。我们在 Just 和 Carpenter(1992)的容量约束理解模型的框架内解释这些发现。