Literature DB >> 26861216

Single-Word Recognition Need Not Depend on Single-Word Features: Narrative Coherence Counteracts Effects of Single-Word Features that Lexical Decision Emphasizes.

Dan W Teng1, Sebastian Wallot2, Damian G Kelty-Stephen3.   

Abstract

Research on reading comprehension of connected text emphasizes reliance on single-word features that organize a stable, mental lexicon of words and that speed or slow the recognition of each new word. However, the time needed to recognize a word might not actually be as fixed as previous research indicates, and the stability of the mental lexicon may change with task demands. The present study explores the effects of narrative coherence in self-paced story reading to single-word feature effects in lexical decision. We presented single strings of letters to 24 participants, in both lexical decision and self-paced story reading. Both tasks included the same words composing a set of adjective-noun pairs. Reading times revealed that the tasks, and the order of the presentation of the tasks, changed and/or eliminated familiar effects of single-word features. Specifically, experiencing the lexical-decision task first gradually emphasized the role of single-word features, and experiencing the self-paced story-reading task afterwards counteracted the effect of single-word features. We discuss the implications that task-dependence and narrative coherence might have for the organization of the mental lexicon. Future work will need to consider what architectures suit the apparent flexibility with which task can accentuate or diminish effects of single-word features.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Lexical decision; Narrative; Reading; Self-paced reading

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26861216     DOI: 10.1007/s10936-016-9416-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res        ISSN: 0090-6905


  25 in total

1.  What you see may not be what you get: a brief, nontechnical introduction to overfitting in regression-type models.

Authors:  Michael A Babyak
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  2004 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.312

2.  Semantic preview benefit during reading.

Authors:  Sven Hohenstein; Reinhold Kliegl
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2013-07-29       Impact factor: 3.051

3.  Word misperception, the neighbor frequency effect, and the role of sentence context: evidence from eye movements.

Authors:  Timothy J Slattery
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal.

Authors:  Dale J Barr; Roger Levy; Christoph Scheepers; Harry J Tily
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 3.059

Review 5.  Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; D B Mark
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1996-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

7.  Models of the reading process.

Authors:  Keith Rayner; Erik D Reichle
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci       Date:  2010-11

8.  The English Lexicon Project.

Authors:  David A Balota; Melvin J Yap; Michael J Cortese; Keith A Hutchison; Brett Kessler; Bjorn Loftis; James H Neely; Douglas L Nelson; Greg B Simpson; Rebecca Treiman
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2007-08

9.  The blue-collar brain.

Authors:  Guy Van Orden; Geoff Hollis; Sebastian Wallot
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2012-06-18       Impact factor: 4.566

10.  Perception and self-organized instability.

Authors:  Karl Friston; Michael Breakspear; Gustavo Deco
Journal:  Front Comput Neurosci       Date:  2012-07-06       Impact factor: 2.380

View more
  4 in total

1.  Contributions of reader- and text-level characteristics to eye-movement patterns during passage reading.

Authors:  Victor Kuperman; Kazunaga Matsuki; Julie A Van Dyke
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2018-07-19       Impact factor: 3.051

2.  Using measures of reading time regularity (RTR) to quantify eye movement dynamics, and how they are shaped by linguistic information.

Authors:  Monika Tschense; Sebastian Wallot
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2022-05-03       Impact factor: 2.004

3.  It's all in the delivery: Effects of context valence, arousal, and concreteness on visual word processing.

Authors:  Bryor Snefjella; Victor Kuperman
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2016-08-24

4.  Switching between reading tasks leads to phase-transitions in reading times in L1 and L2 readers.

Authors:  Sebastian Wallot; Jun Taek Lee; Damian G Kelty-Stephen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-02-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.