Contrasting off-line segmentation decisions with on-line word segmentation during reading.
Contrasting off-line segmentation decisions with on-line word segmentation during reading.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/bjop.12482
复制
发表时间：
2021-08
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Liversedge SP
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
He L;Song Z;Chang M;Zang C;Yan G;Liversedge SP
在两个实验中，我们研究了汉语阅读过程中离线分词和在线分词处理的对应关系。在实验1中，参与者被要求阅读包含关键四字符字符串的句子，然后，他们被要求在随后的离线分词任务中将相同的句子分割成单词。对于每个项目，参与者被分成1词分词组（将4个字符的字符串分割成一个单词）和2词分词组（将4个字符的字符串分割成2个2个字符的单词）。因此，我们根据参与者的离线分词偏差将他们分为两组（1词分词者和2词分词者）。数据分析显示，所有措施都没有可靠的群体效应。为了避免实验1中被试和刺激的异质性，在实验2的规范化研究中确定了两组被试（1词分词者和2词分词者）和三种关键四字串（1词串、歧义串和2词串）。参与者被要求阅读包含这些关键字符串的句子。实验2不存在可靠的群体效应，实验1也是如此。然而，在实验2中，与歧义字符串和2字字符串相比，参与者花在1字字符串上的时间更少，注视的次数也更少。这些结果表明，离线分词偏好并不一定反映在线分词处理过程，并且汉语读者表现出灵活性，使得词或多成分的分词承诺在线进行。
In two experiments, we investigated the correspondences between off‐line word segmentation and on‐line segmentation processing during Chinese reading. In Experiment 1, participants were asked to read sentences which contained critical four‐character strings, and then, they were required to segment the same sentences into words in a later off‐line word segmentation task. For each item, participants were split into 1‐word segmenters (who segmented four‐character strings as a single word) and 2‐word segmenters (who segmented four‐character strings as 2 two‐character words). Thus, we split participants into two groups (1‐word segmenters and 2‐word segmenters) according to their off‐line segmentation bias. The data analysis showed no reliable group effect on all the measures. In order to avoid the heterogeneity of participants and stimuli in Experiment 1, two groups of participants (1‐word segmenters and 2‐word segmenters) and three types of critical four‐character string (1‐word strings, ambiguous strings, and 2‐word strings) were identified in a norming study in Experiment 2. Participants were required to read sentences containing these critical strings. There was no reliable group effect in Experiment 2, as was the case in Experiment 1. However, in Experiment 2, participants spent less time and made fewer fixations on 1‐word strings compared to ambiguous and 2‐word strings. These results indicate that the off‐line word segmentation preferences do not necessarily reflect on‐line word segmentation processing during Chinese reading and that Chinese readers exhibit flexibility such that word, or multiple constituent, segmentation commitments are made on‐line.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
1.8
作者：
MCCONKIE, GW;KERR, PW;ZOLA, D
通讯作者：
ZOLA, D
DOI：
10.1037/xlm0000013
发表时间：
2014-11-01
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
Cutter, Michael G.;Drieghe, Denis;Liversedge, Simon P.
通讯作者：
Liversedge, Simon P.
中文阅读中基于文字的处理的优势：来自眼动的证据
DOI：
10.1037/a0030337
发表时间：
2013-05-01
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
Li, Xingshan;Gu, Junjuan;Rayner, Keith
通讯作者：
Rayner, Keith
DOI：
10.1037/0096-1523.34.5.1277
发表时间：
2008-10
期刊：
Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance
影响因子：
--
作者：
Bai X;Yan G;Liversedge SP;Zang C;Rayner K
通讯作者：
Rayner K
影响因子：
4.3
作者：
Abbott, Matthew J.;Staub, Adrian
通讯作者：
Staub, Adrian