Can readers ignore implausibility? Evidence for nonstrategic monitoring of event-based plausibility in language comprehension
Can readers ignore implausibility? Evidence for nonstrategic monitoring of event-based plausibility in language comprehension
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.10.003
复制
发表时间：
2013-01-01
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
Richter, Tobias
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Isberner, Maj-Britt;Richter, Tobias
我们通过显示读者不能忽视信息的不可信性，即使它不利于手头的任务，为语言理解过程中基于事件的合理性的非战略性监测提供了证据。在两个使用stroop样范式的实验中，参与者被要求在正字法任务（实验1）或非语言颜色判断任务（实验2）中提供独立于合理性的积极和消极反应，以针对在其上下文中合理或不合理的单词。我们预期对可信性的非战略性评估会干扰对不可信话语的积极反应。对反应延迟的方差分析和线性混合模型分析显示，在两个实验中，尽管使用了两个非常不同的任务，但可信性和所需反应之间存在显著的相互作用，支持了这一预测。此外，研究还表明，这种效应不是由似是而非的词语的可预测性差异所驱动的。这些结果表明，合理性监测是信息处理的固有组成部分。(C) 2012 Elsevier B.V.版权所有
We present evidence for a nonstrategic monitoring of event-based plausibility during language comprehension by showing that readers cannot ignore the implausibility of information even if it is detrimental to the task at hand. In two experiments using a Stroop-like paradigm, participants were required to provide positive and negative responses independent of plausibility in an orthographical task (Experiment 1) or a nonlinguistic color judgment task (Experiment 2) to target words that were either plausible or implausible in their context. We expected a nonstrategic assessment of plausibility to interfere with positive responses to implausible words. ANOVAs and linear mixed models analyses of the response latencies revealed a significant interaction of plausibility and required response that supported this prediction in both experiments, despite the use of two very different tasks. Moreover, it could be shown that the effect was not driven by the differential predictability of plausible and implausible words. These results suggest that plausibility monitoring is an inherent component of information processing. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.