Faculty of Arts, KU Leuven, Belgium; Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Belgium.
Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Belgium; Faculty of Engineering Technology, KU Leuven, Belgium.
Cognition. 2024 Jan;242:105623. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2023.105623. Epub 2023 Oct 17.
If some inferences require cognitive effort, could that mean, that all of them do? The scalar term "some" has long fascinated academics from various backgrounds, as it can be interpreted either purely semantically, as "some and possibly all", or pragmatically, as "some and not all". The pragmatic reading implies the generation of what is called a scalar implicature. While scientific investigation of such implicatures has given rise to many potential explanations of the "pragmatic enrichment" phenomenon behind them, the debate between the two dominant frameworks-the literal-first and the default accounts-has not convincingly been settled. With the birth of a new interdisciplinary field, appropriately dubbed experimental pragmatics, the last 20 years have led to a substantial amount of new empirical data on scalar implicatures. In this ongoing investigation, the loading and measuring of Working Memory has become an important experimentation tool, as it allows to test the contrasting hypotheses with regard to the cognitive effort of implicature generation, which are made by the two main theoretical accounts. The current systematic review evaluates the relevant literature until March 08, 2022 in an attempt to shed light on the role of Working Memory in implicature derivation. A comprehensive search, and two-step review procedure yielded a sample of 18 studies, containing data of 23 relevant experiments. Findings were bundled in a narrative synthesis and combined through two separate meta-analyses. Our results support the literal-first account, by showing that the derivation of scalar implicatures is a cognitively effortful process that is sensitive to changes in the available Working Memory resources. However, as the reported effects are relatively weak and capricious, we argue that the development of more sophisticated paradigms and eventually, stronger theories within the field, will be crucial in order to both fully understand the current results and set-up fruitful future research.
如果某些推理需要认知努力,是否意味着所有推理都需要呢?“某些”这个词长期以来一直让来自不同背景的学者着迷,因为它可以从语义上纯粹地解释为“某些且可能全部”,或者从语用学上解释为“某些但不是全部”。语用学解释意味着产生所谓的“量项暗示”。虽然对这些暗示的科学研究已经提出了许多潜在的解释,但对于背后的“语用丰富”现象,两种主要框架——字面优先和默认解释——之间的争论仍未得到令人信服的解决。随着一个新的跨学科领域——实验语用学的诞生,过去 20 年来,关于量项暗示的新实证数据大量涌现。在这一持续的研究中,工作记忆的负荷和测量已成为一个重要的实验工具,因为它允许根据两种主要理论解释,测试关于暗示生成认知努力的对比假设。本系统综述评估了截至 2022 年 3 月 8 日的相关文献,试图阐明工作记忆在暗示推导中的作用。全面的搜索和两步审查程序产生了 18 项研究的样本,其中包含 23 项相关实验的数据。研究结果以叙述性综合的形式进行了汇总,并通过两个单独的荟萃分析进行了组合。我们的结果支持字面优先解释,表明量项暗示的推导是一个认知费力的过程,对可用工作记忆资源的变化敏感。然而,由于报告的影响相对较弱且不稳定,我们认为,该领域发展更复杂的范式和最终更强大的理论将至关重要,以便充分理解当前的结果并为未来富有成效的研究奠定基础。