Hoppe R A, Kess J F
J Psycholinguist Res. 1986 May;15(3):225-41. doi: 10.1007/BF01067456.
In an experiment derived from Lackner and Garrett (1972) 80 subjects were given a dichotic listening task where they were presented with ambiguous sentences to an attended ear and disambiguating sentences to the other, unattended, ear. Each of the sentences was preceded by a thematic context that was biased for one meaning of the ambiguous sentence. In one-half of the instances the contexts biased a meaning consistent with that of the disambiguating sentence, and in the remaining one-half they biased the meaning of the ambiguous sentence in a way that was inconsistent with the meaning of the ambiguous sentence. The meanings of the ambiguous sentences the subjects perceived tended to be those that were consistent with the biasing context, even when that meaning was inconsistent with the meaning of the disambiguating sentence. Therefore, when ambiguous sentences are preceded by a thematic context, a single-reading explanation of the processing is more appropriate than a multiple-reading explanation.
在一项源自拉克纳和加勒特(1972年)的实验中,80名受试者接受了一项双耳分听任务,在该任务中,他们会在一只被关注的耳朵中听到模棱两可的句子,而在另一只未被关注的耳朵中听到消除歧义的句子。每个句子之前都有一个主题背景,该背景偏向于模棱两可句子的一种含义。在一半的情况下,背景偏向与消除歧义句子含义一致的含义,而在其余一半的情况下,背景以与模棱两可句子含义不一致的方式偏向模棱两可句子的含义。受试者所感知到的模棱两可句子的含义往往是与偏向背景一致的那些含义,即使该含义与消除歧义句子的含义不一致。因此,当模棱两可的句子之前有一个主题背景时,对处理过程的单读解释比多读解释更合适。