Literature DB >> 30883170

"A cruel king" is not the same as "a king who is cruel": Modifier position affects how words are encoded and retrieved from memory.

Hossein Karimi1, Michele Diaz1, Fernanda Ferreira2.   

Abstract

We examined whether the position of modifiers in English influences how words are encoded and subsequently retrieved from memory. Compared with premodifiers, postmodifiers might confer more perceptual significance to the associated head nouns, are more consistent with the "given-before-new" information structure, and might also be easier to integrate because the head noun is available before the modifications are encountered. In 4 experiments, we investigated whether premodified (the cruel and merciless king), and postmodified (the king who was cruel and merciless) noun phrases (henceforth, NPs) could induce variations in ease of subsequent retrieval. In Experiments 1, 2, and 3, participants used more pronouns (he), as opposed to full descriptions (the king) to refer to postmodified NPs than to unmodified competitors, but pronominal reference to premodified NPs and unmodified competitors did not differ, suggesting that postmodified NPs are more accessible in memory. When the data from all 3 experiments were combined, we also observed significantly more pronominal reference to post- than to premodified NPs, as well as a greater increase in pronominal reference rates between postmodified NPs and unmodified competitors than between premodified NPs and unmodified competitors. In Experiment 4, words following critical pronouns were read faster when the pronouns referred to modified than to unmodified NPs, and also when the pronouns referred to post- rather than premodified NPs. Taken together, our results show enhanced retrieval facilitation for postmodified NPs compared with premodified NPs. These results are the first to demonstrate that the linear position of modifications results in measurable processing cost at a subsequent point. The results have important implications for memory-based theories of language processing, and also for theories assigning a central role for discourse status and information structure during sentence processing. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 30883170      PMCID: PMC7034774          DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000694

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn        ISSN: 0278-7393            Impact factor:   3.051


  38 in total

1.  Depth of processing in language comprehension: not noticing the evidence.

Authors:  Anthony Sanford; Patrick Sturt
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2002-09-01       Impact factor: 20.229

Review 2.  A capacity theory of comprehension: individual differences in working memory.

Authors:  M A Just; P A Carpenter
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension.

Authors:  Richard L Lewis; Shravan Vasishth; Julie A Van Dyke
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2006-09-01       Impact factor: 20.229

4.  Going the distance: Memory and control processes in active dependency construction.

Authors:  Matthew W Wagers; Colin Phillips
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2013-12-09       Impact factor: 2.143

5.  An activation-based model of sentence processing as skilled memory retrieval.

Authors:  Richard L Lewis; Shravan Vasishth
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2005-05-06

Review 6.  Good-enough linguistic representations and online cognitive equilibrium in language processing.

Authors:  Hossein Karimi; Fernanda Ferreira
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2015-06-23       Impact factor: 2.143

7.  Evaluating information for truthfulness: the effects of logical subordination.

Authors:  L Baker; J L Wagner
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1987-05

8.  Accessing Sentence Participants: The Advantage of First Mention.

Authors:  Morton Ann Gernsbacher; David J Hargreaves
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 3.059

9.  Implicit statistical learning in language processing: word predictability is the key.

Authors:  Christopher M Conway; Althea Bauernschmidt; Sean S Huang; David B Pisoni
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2009-11-18

10.  Processing anomalous anaphors.

Authors:  Anne E Cook
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2014-10
View more
  3 in total

1.  Temporary ambiguity and memory for the context of spoken language.

Authors:  Kaitlin Lord; Sarah Brown-Schmidt
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2022-03-30

2.  Age-related differences in the retrieval of phonologically similar words during sentence processing: Evidence from ERPs.

Authors:  Hossein Karimi; Michele Diaz
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  2021-06-19       Impact factor: 2.781

3.  Effect of Lexical-Semantic Cues during Real-Time Sentence Processing in Aphasia.

Authors:  Niloofar Akhavan; Christina Sen; Carolyn Baker; Noelle Abbott; Michelle Gravier; Tracy Love
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2022-02-25
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.