重复词无法帮助中文读者获得副中央凹词类信息
收稿日期: 2022-11-07
网络出版日期: 2023-11-10
基金资助
国家自然科学基金项目(31800920，31571122)；教育部“长江学者奖励计划”特聘教授项目(T2017120)；全国文化名家暨四个一批人才项目
版权
Repeating Words Cannot Help Chinese Readers to Obtain Word Class Information from Parafoveal Words
Received date: 2022-11-07
Online published: 2023-11-10
Copyright
重复词可以促进词汇的早期加工，利用重复词加工的这一特点，本研究采用边界范式探讨了中文句子阅读中重复词作为预视词出现时能否帮助读者获得预视词的词类信息。实验设置5种预视水平：一致预视、非重复−词类一致预视、非重复−词类不一致预视、重复−词类一致预视和重复−词类不一致预视。结果发现：(1)重复预视条件的主效应显著，重复预视条件下，读者对目标词的首次注视时间、单一注视时间、凝视时间、总注视时间短于非重复预视条件，且跳读率更高；(2)词类一致性的主效应不显著；(3)重复和非重复条件下词类一致性预视的差异不显著。结果表明，当利用重复词促进词汇早期加工时，读者仍然没有获得预视词的词类信息。研究结果支持了E-Z读者模型。
鹿子佳 , 张志超 , 符颖 , 张慢慢 , 臧传丽 , 白学军 . 重复词无法帮助中文读者获得副中央凹词类信息[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2023 , 21(5) : 577 -584 . DOI: 10.12139/j.1672-0628.2023.05.001
Repeating words can facilitate word processing at the early stage during sentence reading. The current study aimed to investigate whether readers can extract word class information from parafoveal words using repeating words that appeared in the same sentences prior to the target words as preview words. The results showed that: 1) fixation durations of the target word were shorter and the fixation probabilities were lower in repeated preview than in non-repeated preview; 2) the main effect of word class was not reliable; 3) there was no significant difference in the consistency of word classes between repeated and non-repeated previews. The findings suggest that readers do not obtain word class information of parafoveal words when repeating words are used as previews. The results support the E-Z reader model.
| 鹿子佳, 符颖, 张慢慢, 臧传丽, 白学军. 中文词类信息在副中央凹中的加工. 心理学报, 2022, 54 (5): 441- 452. | |
| 闫国利, 巫金根, 臧传丽, 白学军. 阅读知觉广度眼动研究述评. 心理学探新, 2010, 30 (2): 23- 28. | |
| 闫国利, 熊建萍, 臧传丽, 余莉莉, 崔磊, 白学军. 阅读研究中的主要眼动指标评述. 心理科学进展, 2013, 21 (4): 589- 605. | |
| 闫国利, 张巧明, 白学军. 中文阅读知觉广度的影响因素研究. 心理发展与教育, 2013, 29 (2): 121- 130. | |
| 中国社会科学院语言研究所词典编辑室. (2012). 现代汉语词典 (第6版). 北京: 商务印书馆. | |
| Angele, B., Tran, R., & Rayner, K.. Parafoveal-foveal overlap can facilitate ongoing word identification during reading: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2013, 39 (2): 526- 538. | |
| Brothers, T., & Traxler, M. J. (2016). Anticipating syntax during reading: Evidence from the boundary change paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(12), 1894–1906. | |
| Cai, Q., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). SUBTLEX-CH: Chinese word and character frequencies based on film subtitles. PLoS One, 5(6), e10729. | |
| Drieghe, D., & Seem, R. C.. Parafoveal processing of repeated words during reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2022, 29 (4): 1451- 1460. | |
| Engbert, R., Longtin, A., & Kliegl, R.. A dynamical model of saccade generation in reading based on spatially distributed lexical processing. Vision Research, 2002, 42 (5): 621- 636. | |
| Engbert, R., Nuthmann, A., Richter, E. M., & Kliegl, R.. SWIFT: A dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. Psychological Review, 2005, 112 (4): 777- 813. | |
| Hy?n?, J., & Niemi, P.. Eye movements during repeated reading of a text. Acta Psychologica, 1990, 73 (3): 259- 280. | |
| Kanwisher, N. G.. Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token individuation. Cognition, 1987, 27 (2): 117- 143. | |
| Kanwisher, N. G.. Repetition blindness and illusory conjunctions: Errors in binding visual types with visual tokens. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1991, 17 (2): 404- 421. | |
| Kanwisher, N. G., & Potter, M. C.. Repetition blindness: Levels of processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1990, 16 (1): 30- 47. | |
| Kliegl, R.. Toward a perceptual-span theory of distributed processing in reading: A reply to Rayner, Pollatsek, Drieghe, Slattery, and Reichle (2007). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2007, 136 (3): 530- 537. | |
| Ledoux, K., Gordon, P. C., Camblin, C. C., & Swaab, T. Y.. Coreference and lexical repetition: Mechanisms of discourse integration. Memory & Cognition, 2007, 35 (4): 801- 815. | |
| R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R foundation for statistical computing. | |
| Raney, G. E., & Rayner, K.. Word frequency effects and eye movements during two readings of a text. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1995, 49 (2): 151- 173. | |
| Rayner, K.. The perceptual span and peripheral cues in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 1975, 7 (1): 65- 81. | |
| Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K.. E-Z reader: A cognitive-control, serial-attention model of eye movement behavior during reading. Cognitive Systems Research, 2006, 7 (1): 4- 22. | |
| Reichle, E. D., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A.. The E-Z reader model of eye-movement control in reading: comparisons to other models. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2003, 26 (4): 445- 476. | |
| Schotter, E. R., Reichle, E. D., & Rayner, K. (2014). Rethinking parafoveal processing in reading: Serial-attention models can explain semantic preview benefit and N+2 preview effects. Visual Cognition, 22(3–4), 309–333. | |
| Snell, J., Meeter, M., & Grainger, J.. Evidence for simultaneous syntactic processing of multiple words during reading. PLoS One, 2017, 12 (3): e0173720. | |
| Traxler, M. J., Foss, D. J., Seely, R. E, Kaup, B., & Morris, R. K.. Priming in sentence processing: Intralexical spreading activation, schemas, and situation models. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2000, 29 (6): 581- 595. | |
| Veldre, A., & Andrews, S. (2017). Parafoveal preview benefit in sentence reading: Independent effects of plausibility and orthographic relatedness. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(2), 519–528. | |
| Wang, J. W., Angele, B., Ma, G. J., & Li, X. S. (2021). Repetition causes confusion: Insights to word segmentation during Chinese reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 47(1), 147–156. | |
| Zang, C. L., Du, H., Bai, X. J., Yan, G. L., & Liversedge, S. P. (2020). Word skipping in Chinese reading: The role of high-frequency preview and syntactic felicity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(4), 603–620. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |