无关言语影响老年人阅读过程的眼动研究

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 采用眼动记录技术考察有意义言语、无意义言语和安静环境对老年和青年读者篇章阅读和词汇加工过程的影响。结果发现：相比于安静和无意义言语条件，所有被试在有意义言语条件下的篇章阅读速度降低，平均注视时间更长，向前眼跳长度缩短，目标词上的总注视时间更长，表现出显著的无关言语效应，而这一效应不存在显著的年龄差异。结果表明，与青年人相同，老年人的后期词汇加工和篇章语义信息加工受到了无关言语中语义成分的干扰。说明在自然阅读过程中，老年人抑制背景言语语义信息干扰的能力与青年人相似。

关键词: 无关言语效应, 老化, 篇章阅读, 眼动

Abstract: The present study investigated the influences of different irrelevant speeches during Chinese reading between older and younger readers by using measurements of eye movements. Participants were asked to read passages in the presence of meaningful speech, meaningless speech, and silence. Results showed that: 1) There was significant irrelevant speech effect on Chinese passage reading for all the participants, such that the meaningful background speech reduced participants’ reading rate, and led them to make more and longer fixations, shorter forward saccades. 2) Both groups of readers spent longer time on target words when exposed to meaningful speech. 3) No significant differences in irrelevant speech effects between younger and older adults were observed. These results suggest that older adults’ ability to suppress the interference of semantic content in background noise does not decline during natural reading.

Key words: irrelevant speech effect, aging, passage reading, eye movement

中图分类号:

B844

何立媛, 田雪, 李悦, 沈凤丹, 王永胜, 吴捷. 无关言语影响老年人阅读过程的眼动研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(3): 375-381.

HE Liyuan, TIAN Xue, LI Yue, SHEN Fengdan, WANG Yongsheng, WU Jie. The Irrelevant Speech Effect on Reading in Older Adults: Evidence from Eye Movements[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(3): 375-381.

参考文献

郭惠兰, 宋子明, 张煜婧, 闫国利. (2017). 新闻广播背景音对大学生阅读效率影响的眼动研究. 心理研究, 10(4), 15-21, doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-1159.2017.04.003
何立媛, 黄有玉, 王梦轩, 孟珠, 闫国利. (2015). 不同背景音对中文篇章阅读影响的眼动研究. 心理科学, 38(6), 1290-1295
孟珠, 闫国利. (2018). 阅读任务中无关言语效应的作用机制:干扰基于内容还是过程? 心理科学进展, 26(2), 262-269.
彭华茂, 毛晓飞. (2018). 抑制对老年人舌尖现象的影响. 心理学报, 50(10), 1142-1150
闫国利, 孟珠. (2018). 无关言语对阅读的干扰基于内容还是过程?——来自眼动研究的证据. 心理科学, 41(1), 2-7
闫国利, 熊建萍, 臧传丽, 余莉莉, 崔磊, 白学军. (2013). 阅读研究中的主要眼动指标评述. 心理科学进展, 21(4), 589-605
Ashby, J. (2010). Phonology is fundamental in skilled reading:Evidence from ERPs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 95-100, doi:10.3758/PBR.17.1.95.
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. M., & Walker, S. C. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1-48.
Bell, R., & Buchner, A. (2007). Equivalent irrelevant-sound effects for old and young adults. Memory & Cognition, 35(2), 352-364.
Bell, R., Buchner, A., & Mund, I. (2008). Age-related differences in irrelevant-speech effects. Psychology and Aging, 23(2), 377-391, doi:10.1037/0882-7974.23.2.377.
Colle, H. A., & Welsh, A. (1976). Acoustic masking in primary memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15(1), 17-31, doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(76)90003-7.
Connelly, S. L., Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. T. (1991). Age and reading:The impact of distraction. Psychology and Aging, 6(4), 533-541, doi:10.1037/0882-7974.6.4.533.
Elliott, E. M. (2002). The irrelevant-speech effect and children:Theoretical implications of developmental change. Memory & Cognition, 30, 478-487.
Elliott, E. M., & Cowan, N. (2005). Coherence of the irrelevant-sound effect:Individual profiles of short-term memory and susceptibility to task-irrelevant materials. Memory & Cognition, 33, 664-675.
Guerreiro, M. J. S., Murphy, D. R., & van Gerven, P. W. M. (2010). The role of sensory modality in age-related distraction:A critical review and a renewed view. Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 975-1022, doi:10.1037/a0020731.
Guerreiro, M. J. S., Murphy, D. R., & van Gerven, P. W. M. (2013). Making sense of age-related distractibility:The critical role of sensory modality. Acta Psychologica, 142(2), 184-194, doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.11.007.
Hsieh, S., & Lin, Y. C. (2017). Strategies for stimulus selective stopping in the elderly. Acta Psychologica, 173, 122-131, doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.12.011.
Hyönä, J., & Ekholm, M. (2016). Background speech effects on sentence processing during reading:An eye movement study. PLoS One, 11(3), e0152133, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152133.
Jones, D. M., & Macken, W. J. (1993). Irrelevant tones produce an irrelevant speech effect:Implications for phonological coding in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19(2), 369-381, doi:10.1037/0278-7393.19.2.369.
Kemper, S., & McDowd, J. (2006). Eye movements of young and older adults while reading with distraction. Psychology and Aging, 21(1), 32-39.
Lustig, C., Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. (2007). Inhibitory deficit theory:Recent developments in a "new view". In D. S. Gorfein & C. M. MacLeod (Eds.), The place of inhibition in cognition (pp. 145-162). Washington:American Psychological Association.
Mahajan, Y., Kim, J., & Davis, C. (2020). Does working memory protect against auditory distraction in older adults? BMC Geriatrics, 20(1), 515, doi:10.1186/s12877-020-01909-w.
Marsh, J. E., Hughes, R. W., & Jones, D. M. (2009). Interference by process, not content, determines semantic auditory distraction. Cognition, 110(1), 23-38, doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.08.003.
Marsh, J. E., Perham, N., Sörqvist, P., & Jones, D. M. (2014). Boundaries of semantic distraction:Dominance and lexicality act at retrieval. Memory & Cognition, 42(8), 1285-1301.
Mund, I., Bell, R., & Buchner, A. (2012). Aging and interference in story recall. Experimental Aging Research, 38(1), 20-41, doi:10.1080/0361073X.2012.636724.
Murphy, D. R., Bailey, H., Pearson, M., & Albert, G. (2018). The irrelevant speech effect among younger and older adults:The influence of background noises on reading comprehension. Experimental Aging Research, 44(2), 162-178, doi:10.1080/0361073X.2017.1422561.
Oswald, C. J. P., Tremblay, S., & Jones, D. M. (2000). Disruption of comprehension by the meaning of irrelevant sound. Memory, 8(5), 345-350, doi:10.1080/09658210050117762.
Parsons, T. D., & Barnett, M. (2017). Validity of a newly developed measure of memory:Feasibility study of the virtual environment grocery store. Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, 59(4), 1227-1235, doi:10.3233/JAD-170295.
Potter, L. M., & Grealy, M. A. (2019). Aging and the prevalence of ‘ironic’ action errors under avoidant instruction. PLoS One, 14(3), e0213340, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0213340.
R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria:R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Röer, J. P., Bell, R., Marsh, J. E., & Buchner, A. (2015). Age equivalence in auditory distraction by changing and deviant speech sounds. Psychology and Aging, 30(4), 849-855, doi:10.1037/pag0000055.
Röer, J. P., Körner, U., Buchner, A., & Bell, R. (2017). Attentional capture by taboo words:A functional view of auditory distraction. Emotion, 17(4), 740-750, doi:10.1037/emo0000274.
Rouleau, N., & Belleville, S. (1996). Irrelevant speech effect in aging:An assessment of inhibitory processes in working memory. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B:Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 51(6), 356-363.
Schneider, J. (2002). Vision Chart. Retrieved June 2, 2017, from https://www2.nau.edu/lrm22/lessons/human_senses/images/vision_chart.pdf
Schwarz, H., Schlittmeier, S., Otto, A., Persike, M., Klatte, M., Imhof, M., & Meinhardt-Injac, B. (2015). Age differences in the irrelevant sound effect:A serial recognition paradigm. Psihologija, 48(1), 35-43, doi:10.2298/PSI1501035S.
Sereno, S. C., & Rayner, K. (2000). Spelling-sound regularity effects on eye fixations in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 402-409, doi:10.3758/BF03205559.
Stothart, G., & Kazanina, N. (2016). Auditory perception in the aging brain:The role of inhibition and facilitation in early processing. Neurobiology of Aging, 47, 23-34, doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2016.06.022.
Tremblay, S., Nicholls, A. P., Alford, D., & Jones, D. M. (2000). The irrelevant sound effect:Does speech play a special role? Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(6), 1750-1754, doi:10.1037/0278-7393.26.6.1750.
Tun, P. A., O'Kane, G., & Wingfield, A. (2002). Distraction by competing speech in young and older adult listeners. Psychology and Aging, 17(3), 453-467, doi:10.1037/0882-7974.17.3.453.
van Gerven, P. W. M., & Murphy, D. R. (2010). Aging and distraction by irrelevant speech:Does emotional valence matter? The Journals of Gerontology. Series B:Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 65(6), 667-670.
Wechsler, D., Chen, Y. H., & Chen, X. Y. (2002). WAIS-III Chinese version technical manual. San Antonio, TX:The Psychological Corporation.
Weeks, J. C., Grady, C. L., Hasher, L., & Buchsbaum, B. R. (2020). Holding on to the past:Older adults show lingering neural activation of no-longer-relevant items in working memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 32(10), 1946-1962, doi:10.1162/jocn_a_01596.
Yan, G. L., Meng, Z., Liu, N., He, L. Y., & Paterson, K. B. (2018). Effects of irrelevant background speech on eye movements during reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(6), 1270-1275, doi:10.1080/17470218.2017.1339718.
Yu, J., Li, J., & Huang, X. (2012). The Beijing version of the montreal cognitive assessment as a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment:A community-based study. BMC Psychiatry, 12(1), 156.

[1]	贾宁, 容丽卓, 代景华. 社会性线索对内隐和外显元认知监控的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(5): 593-599.
[2]	李士一, 谢岩枫, 赵光, 白学军. 媒体多任务经验对不同注意模式下内隐记忆的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(4): 433-440.
[3]	张慢慢, 胡惠兰, 边菡, 李芳, 张志超, 臧传丽. 中文阅读中快速读者与慢速读者的词频效应[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(3): 304-310.
[4]	何立媛, 赵星, 白玉, 刘妮娜. 汉语老年读者的多词单元加工：来自眼动研究的证据[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(2): 160-166.
[5]	秦钊, 王影超, 叶佳滢, 袁小源, 闫国利. 聋人句子阅读中的视觉功能补偿现象：副中央凹−中央凹效应的证据[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(2): 167-173.
[6]	顾俊娟, 高志华, 马绍扬. 嵌套词汉字位置加工的亚词边界效应[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(1): 1-7.
[7]	陈艳桃, 高晓彤, 陈兆琳, 黄时华. 基于双因素模型的老年人生命意义感与心理健康：老化态度的中介作用——基于双因素模型的老年人生命意义感与心理健康：老化态度的中介作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(1): 88-95.
[8]	赵赛男, 李琳, 张俐娟, 王敬欣. 汉语阅读中高限制性语境对不可预测词加工的影响：眼动研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(6): 736-742.
[9]	刘璐, 姜雅梅, 张巧明, 李诸洋. 义符位置与语义透明度对形声字语义激活的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(5): 585-591.
[10]	李赛男, 闫国利, 王亚丽, 刘敏, 赵淑萍. 一年级小学生阅读知觉广度的眼动研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(5): 606-611.
[11]	张苏媛, 兰泽波, 张水, 孟珠, 闫国利. 无关言语对一年级小学生阅读影响的眼动研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(4): 433-438,446.
[12]	高晓雷, 沈梦, 任晓飞, 白学军, 高蕾. 高、低汉语水平藏–汉读者汉语阅读知觉广度及预视效应[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(3): 297-303,333.
[13]	贺斐, 梁菲菲, 白学军. 汉语阅读伴随词汇学习的形旁类别一致性效应[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(3): 304-311.
[14]	康立超, 兰泽波, 韩映虹. 不同阅读方式下图画书重复阅读对4～5岁幼儿文字关注影响的眼动研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(3): 368-374.
[15]	乌仁其木格, 赵傲雪, 汪钰涵, 庄想灵, 马国杰. “找茬”任务中的视野偏好与参照策略[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(2): 166-171.