Literature DB >> 21463359

The cognitive dynamics of negated sentence verification.

Rick Dale1, Nicholas D Duran.   

Abstract

We explored the influence of negation on cognitive dynamics, measured using mouse-movement trajectories, to test the classic notion that negation acts as an operator on linguistic processing. In three experiments, participants verified the truth or falsity of simple statements, and we tracked the computer-mouse trajectories of their responses. Sentences expressing these facts sometimes contained a negation. Such negated statements could be true (e.g., "elephants are not small") or false (e.g., "elephants are not large"). In the first experiment, as predicted by the classic notion of negation, we found that negation caused more discreteness in the mouse trajectory of a response. The second experiment induced a simple context for these statements, yet negation still increased discreteness in trajectories. A third experiment enhanced the pragmatic context of sentences, and the discreteness was substantially diminished, with one primary measure no longer significantly showing increased discreteness at all. Traditional linguistic theories predict rapid shifts in cognitive dynamics occur due to the nature of negation: It is an operator that reverses the truth or falsity of an interpretation. We argue that these results support both propositional and contextual accounts of negation present in the literature, suggesting that contextual factors are crucial for determining the kind of cognitive dynamics displayed. We conclude by drawing broader lessons about theories of cognition from the case of negation.
Copyright © 2011 Cognitive Science Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21463359     DOI: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01164.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Sci        ISSN: 0364-0213


  21 in total

1.  Perceptual simulations can be as expressive as first-order logic.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Uchida; Nicholas L Cassimatis; J R Scally
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2012-06-04

2.  Mouse-tracking evidence for parallel anticipatory option evaluation.

Authors:  Edward A Cranford; Jarrod Moss
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2017-12-23

3.  Design factors in mouse-tracking: What makes a difference?

Authors:  Pascal J Kieslich; Martin Schoemann; Tobias Grage; Johanna Hepp; Stefan Scherbaum
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2020-02

4.  Hand in motion reveals mind in motion.

Authors:  Jonathan B Freeman; Rick Dale; Thomas A Farmer
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-04-20

5.  On the role of rarity information in speakers' choice of frame.

Authors:  Hidehito Honda; Toshihiko Matsuka
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2014-07

6.  The detection of faked identity using unexpected questions and mouse dynamics.

Authors:  Merylin Monaro; Luciano Gamberini; Giuseppe Sartori
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-05-18       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  There was not, they did not: May negation cause the negated ideas to be remembered as existing?

Authors:  Józef Maciuszek; Romuald Polczyk
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Three-dimensional reach trajectories as a probe of real-time decision-making between multiple competing targets.

Authors:  Jason P Gallivan; Craig S Chapman
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2014-07-23       Impact factor: 4.677

9.  When expectancies collide: Action dynamics reveal the interaction between stimulus plausibility and congruency.

Authors:  Moreno I Coco; Nicholas D Duran
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-12

10.  Statistical Models for Predicting Threat Detection From Human Behavior.

Authors:  Timothy Kelley; Mary J Amon; Bennett I Bertenthal
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-04-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.