首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Frontiers in Public Health >Proximity and Same Case Marking Do Not Increase Attraction Effect in Comprehension: Evidence From Eye-Tracking Experiments in Korean
【2h】

Proximity and Same Case Marking Do Not Increase Attraction Effect in Comprehension: Evidence From Eye-Tracking Experiments in Korean

机译:接近度和相同案例标记不会提高理解力的吸引力:韩国人眼动实验的证据

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Previous studies have suggested that during the on-line sentence processing, relevant memory representations are directly accessed based on cues at retrieval (McElree et al., ). Under this hypothesis, retrieval cues activate any memory representation with matching features, leading to the so-called attraction effect. This predicts that attraction effects would be modulated by memory representation of a distractor. Here, we investigated this possibility, focusing on two factors (i.e., proximity to the retrieval point and the number of matching features) that would affect representation of a distractor in three Korean eye-tracking experiments. We predicted that if memory representation of a distractor decays over time, a distractor close to a retrieval point would lead to stronger attraction effects. We also predicted that a distractor would be more likely to lead to interference when it shares a higher number of matching features with the retrieval cues of a dependency, relative to the target of the dependency, due to multiple direct accesses based on multiple matching cues. However, the results did not show evidence that proximity of a distractor to the retrieval point enhanced attraction effects. Likewise, there was no evidence that a greater number of matching cues of a distractor alone would trigger more mis-retrieval, in contrast to a previous finding that a greater number of mismatching cues of a licit antecedent in addition to a greater number of matching cues of a distractor did so (Parker and Phillips, ). On the other hand, the results suggested that a distractor marked with nominative case was more likely to be mis-retrieved as the subject of a verb, compared to a distractor marked with a dative case, suggesting that the subject grammatical role is a critical cue for a subject-verb agreement. These results are best compatible with the hypothesis that retrieval cues are weighted, possibly depending on the nature of the dependency that is currently processed.
机译:先前的研究表明,在在线句子处理过程中,基于检索时的线索直接访问相关的内存表示形式(McElree等,)。在这种假设下,检索提示会激活具有匹配特征的任何记忆表示,从而导致所谓的吸引效应。这预示着吸引效应将通过干扰因素的记忆表示来调节。在这里,我们研究了这种可能性,主要关注两个因素(即与检索点的接近程度和匹配特征的数量),这将影响三个韩国眼动实验中干扰物的表示。我们预测,如果干扰物的记忆表示随着时间的流逝而衰减,则接近检索点的干扰物将导致更强的吸引作用。我们还预测,由于基于多个匹配线索的多次直接访问,相对于依赖关系的目标,干扰项与依赖项的检索线索共享更多数量的匹配特征时,更可能导致干扰。但是,结果并未显示出牵张器靠近检索点的证据会增强吸引力。同样,没有证据表明单独的干扰物的更多匹配提示会触发更多的错误检索,这与先前的发现相反,除了大量匹配提示之外,合法先例的更多匹配错误提示也是如此。一个干扰者这样做了(Parker和Phillips,)。另一方面,结果表明,标有主格的干扰词比标有格的干扰词更容易被误检索为动词的主语,这表明主语的语法作用是关键提示。达成主语-动词协议。这些结果与假设检索线索经过加权的假设最相符,这可能取决于当前正在处理的依赖项的性质。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号