What happened (and what did not): Discourse constraints on encoding of plausible alternatives

被引:41
作者
Fraundorf, Scott H. [1 ]
Benjamin, Aaron S. [1 ]
Watson, Duane G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Illinois, Dept Psychol, Champaign, IL 61820 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会; 美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Discourse; Recognition memory; Reading; Alternative sets; Fonts; EYE-MOVEMENTS; LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION; RECOLLECTION REJECTION; PITCH ACCENTS; INFORMATION; MEMORY; FAMILIARITY; CONTRAST; FOCUS; AGE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jml.2013.06.003
中图分类号
H0 [语言学];
学科分类号
030303 ; 0501 ; 050102 ;
摘要
Three experiments investigated how font emphasis influences reading and remembering discourse. Although past work suggests that contrastive pitch contours benefit memory by promoting encoding of salient alternatives, it is unclear both whether this effect generalizes to other forms of linguistic prominence and how the set of alternatives is constrained. Participants read discourses in which some true propositions had salient alternatives (e.g., British scientists found the endangered monkey when the discourse also mentioned French scientists) and completed a recognition memory test. In Experiments 1 and 2, font emphasis in the initial presentation increased participants' ability to later reject false statements about salient alternatives but not about unmentioned items (e.g., Portuguese scientists). In Experiment 3, font emphasis helped reject false statements about plausible alternatives, but not about less plausible alternatives that were nevertheless established in the discourse. These results suggest readers encode a narrow set of only those alternatives plausible in the particular discourse. They also indicate that multiple manipulations of linguistic prominence, not just prosody, can lead to consideration of alternatives. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:196 / 227
页数:32
相关论文
共 83 条
[1]   Focus and noun phrase anaphors in spoken language comprehension [J].
Almor, Amit ;
Eimas, Peter D. .
LANGUAGE AND COGNITIVE PROCESSES, 2008, 23 (02) :201-225
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1995, The Handbook of Phonological Theory, DOI DOI 10.1111/B.9780631201267.1996.00018.X
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2007, An introduction to categorical data analysis
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1997, The OSU Research Foundation
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1988, Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2011, Oxford English Dictionary
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2002, SPEECH PROSODY 2002
[8]   Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items [J].
Baayen, R. H. ;
Davidson, D. J. ;
Bates, D. M. .
JOURNAL OF MEMORY AND LANGUAGE, 2008, 59 (04) :390-412
[9]  
Baayen R.H., 2008, ANALYSING LINGUISTIC, DOI DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511801686
[10]  
Bates D., 2011, R PACKAGE VERSION 09