Roelofs Ardi
Radboud University, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Centre for Cognition, Nijmegen, NL.
J Cogn. 2020 Sep 3;3(1):20. doi: 10.5334/joc.112.
Misunderstanding exists about what constitutes comprehension-based monitoring in speaking and what it empirically implies. Here, I make clear that the use of the speech comprehension system is the defining property of comprehension-based monitoring rather than conscious and deliberate processing, as maintained by Nozari (2020). Therefore, contrary to what Nozari claims, my arguments in Roelofs (2020) are suitable for addressing her criticisms raised against comprehension-based monitoring. Also, I indicate that Nozari does not correctly describe my view in a review of her paper. Finally, I further clarify what comprehension-based monitoring entails empirically, thereby dealing with Nozari's new criticisms and inaccurate descriptions of empirical findings. I conclude that comprehension-based monitoring remains a viable account of self-monitoring in speaking.
对于口语中基于理解的监测的构成要素以及其实证意义存在误解。在此，我明确指出，如诺扎里（2020年）所主张的那样，言语理解系统的使用才是基于理解的监测的决定性特征，而非有意识的刻意加工。因此，与诺扎里所声称的相反，我在罗洛夫斯（2020年）中的论点适用于回应她对基于理解的监测提出的批评。此外，我指出诺扎里在对她论文的一篇评论中没有正确描述我的观点。最后，我进一步从实证角度阐明基于理解的监测的内涵，从而应对诺扎里对实证研究结果的新批评和不准确描述。我得出结论，基于理解的监测仍然是口语自我监测的一个可行解释。
