Using eye tracking to investigate failure to notice word transpositions in reading
Using eye tracking to investigate failure to notice word transpositions in reading
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104846
复制
发表时间：
2021-07-17
期刊：
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Staub, Adrian
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Huang, Kuan-Jung;Staub, Adrian
之前的研究(Mirault，Snell，&Grainger，2018)已经证明，当一个不符合语法的句子是由语法句子中的两个词互换而成时(例如，白色是猫大的)，受试者有时会错误地判断它是语法的。在这里，我们介绍了两个眼球跟踪实验，旨在评估这种现象在更自然的阅读任务中的普遍性，并探索理论解释。读者未能注意到换位的速度与Mirault等人的大致相同。(2018)。当两个单词都很短，当读者的眼睛跳过两个单词中的一个，而不是直接凝视其中一个时，人们更容易注意到换位。转置的词是开放的还是封闭的并没有产生可靠的效果。只有当受试者最终判断句子不符合语法时，移位的单词才会导致眼动记录的中断，而不是当他们判断句子符合语法时。我们认为，这一结果与Mirault等人的说法并不完全一致。(2018)，该理论将未能注意到换位归因于相邻单词的并行加工，或者是后期的后知觉理性推理(Gibson，Bergen，&Piantadosi，2013)。我们认为单词识别是连续的，但每个单词在词汇后整合到其上下文中可能不是完全渐进的。
Previous research (Mirault, Snell, & Grainger, 2018) has demonstrated that subjects sometimes incorrectly judge an ungrammatical sentence as grammatical when it is created by the transposition of two words in a grammatical sentence (e.g., The white was cat big). Here we present two eye-tracking experiments designed to assess the prevalence of this phenomenon in a more natural reading task, and to explore theoretical explanations. Readers failed to notice transpositions at about the same rate as in Mirault et al. (2018). Failure to notice the transposition was more common when both words were short, and when readers' eyes skipped, rather than directly fixated, one of the two words. The status of the transposed words as open- or closed-class did not have a reliable effect. The transposed words caused disruption in the eye movement record only on trials when participants ultimately judged the sentence to be ungrammatical, not when they judged the sentence to be grammatical. We argue that the results are not entirely consistent with the account offered by Mirault et al. (2018), which attributes failure to notice transpositions to parallel processing of adjacent words, or with a late, post-perceptual rational inference account (Gibson, Bergen, & Piantadosi, 2013). We propose that word recognition is serial, but post-lexical integration of each word into its context may not be perfectly incremental.