Study on Mental Processes of Different Types of Chinese Negative Sentences

Abstract

Abstract: The study investigated dynamic mental processing of different types of negative sentences using sentence-word decision and sentence-picture judgment tasks. Experiment 1 examined the mental process of literal negative sentences. Participants were presented with affirmative and negative sentences containing a target entity. After reading sentence, participants were presented with a picture of the target entity that was either matched or mismatched with property of the entity in the preceding sentence. The delay between sentence and word was 750ms in Experiment 1a and 1500ms in Experiment 1b. In Experiment 2, most of the procedures were same as that in Experiment 1 expect that participants read metaphorical negative and affirmative sentences and then completed word judgment tasks. The result showed that for literal negative sentences, reaction time in match condition was longer than in mismatch condition in 750ms, however in 1500ms the result was opposite. For metaphorical negative sentences, reaction time in match condition was also longer than in mismatch condition in 750ms, but there was no difference between the two conditions in 1500ms. The whole study proved the assumption that mental processes of different types of negative sentences were dynamically varied. Processing of literal negative sentences confirms to the two-stage simulating theory, while processing of metaphorical negative sentences is more accorded with suppression/preservation hypothesis.

Key words: literal negative sentence, metaphorical negative sentence, two-stage simulating theory, suppression/preservation hypothesis

摘要： 采用词汇/图片判断范式,以不同性质的否定句和其对应的肯定句为实验材料,以词汇/图片判断的反应时和正确率为因变量指标,探讨不同性质汉语否定句的加工是否是动态变化的过程。研究分为两个大实验四个小实验。实验一采用句图匹配任务,否定句是对具体现实情境的否定,实验1a和1b分别考察句图短时间间隔和长时间间隔下否定意义的加工。实验二采用词汇判断任务,实验材料为隐喻形式的否定句。实验2a和2b分别为句词短时间间隔和长时间间隔。实验1发现短时间间隔时,句图不匹配条件下图片判断时间短于匹配时;长时间间隔时相反,句图匹配条件下图片判断时间更短。实验2发现短时间间隔时,句词不匹配条件下词汇判断时间短于匹配时,而长时间间隔时匹配与否的词汇判断时间无差异。综合两个实验结果表明,对现实情境的具体否定句符合两阶段模拟加工,被否定意义在加工早期被表征,但会因句子实际意义的通达而得到抑制;而隐喻形式的抽象否定句加工更符合抑制/保存假说,被否定意义在加工早期被表征,并在加工后期仍保留在头脑中。

关键词: 具体否定句, 隐喻否定句, 两阶段模拟加工理论, 抑制/保存假说

CLC Number:

B842.1

Li Ying, Wu Jun, Liang Yuanyuan, Wang Yue. Study on Mental Processes of Different Types of Chinese Negative Sentences[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2017, 15(3): 309-316.

李莹, 吴军, 梁园园, 王悦. 不同性质汉语否定句心理加工过程的实验研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2017, 15(3): 309-316.

References

1 陈广耀, 吴洺仪, 魏小平, 周苗, 何先友, 莫雷.(2014a). 状态不确定独立否定句的加工机制. 心理学报, 46(2), 204-215.
2 陈广耀, 张维, 陈庆, 赵雪汝, 何先友.(2014b). 类别型状态不确定独立否定句的加工机制: 来自眼动实验的证据. 心理学报, 46(10), 1426-1441.
3 何先友, 王靖, 徐妍娜.(2011). 前期情境对否定句加工进程的影响. 华南师范大学学报(社会科学版), 1, 87-94.
4 李莹.(2016). 论语言理解中否定意义的心理机制. 河南师范大学学报（哲学社会科学版）, 43（5）,166-171.
5 李莹, 王瑞明, 莫雷.(2007). 否定句理解中知觉仿真动态过程. 心理科学, 30(4), 791-79.
6 Arroyo, F. V.(1982). Negatives in context. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 118-126.
7 Autry, K. S., & Levine, W. H.(2012). Activation of negated and non-negated entities. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 1474-1485.
8 Giora, R.(2003). On our mind: Salience, context and figurative language. New York: Oxford University Press.
9 Giora, R.(2006). Anything negatives can do affirmatives can do just as well, except for some metaphors. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 981-1014.
10 Giora, R., Fein, O., Aschkenazi, K., & Zlozover, I. A.(2007). Negation in context: A functional approach to suppression. Discourse Processes, 43(2), 153-172.
11 Giora, R., Heruti, V., Metuki, N., & Fein, O.(2009). ″When we say no we mean no″: Interpreting negation in vision and language. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(11), 2222-2239.
12 Hasson, U., & Glucksberg, S.(2006). Does understanding negation entail affirmation? An examination of negated metaphors. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 1015-1032.
13 Kaup, B., Ludtke, J., & Zwaan, R. A.(2006). Processing negated sentences with contradictory predicates: Is a door that is not open mentally closed? Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 1033-1050.
14 Kaup, B., Yaxley, R. H., Madden, C. J., & Zwaan, R. A.(2007). Experiential simulations of negated text information. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60(7), 976-990.
15 Kaup, B., & Zwaan, R. A.(2003). Effects of negation and situational presence on the accessibility of text information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition. 29, 439-446.
16 Ludtke, J., Friedrich, C. K., De Filippis, M., & Kaup, B.(2008). Event-related potential correlates of negation in a sentence-picture verification paradigm. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(8), 1355-1370.
17 Orenes, I., Beltrán, D., & Santamaría, C.(2014). How negation is understood: Evidence from the visual world paradigm. Journal of Memory and Language, 74, 36-45.
18 Strack, F., & Deutsch, R.(2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 220-247.
19 Tian, Y., Breheny, R., & Ferguson, H. J.(2010). Why we simulate negated information: A dynamic pragmatic account. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(12), 2305-2312.
20 Trabasso, T., Rollins, H., & Shaughnessy, E.(1971). Storage and verification stages in processing concepts. Cognitive Psychology, 2, 239-289.
21 Wason, P. C.(1959). The processing of positive and negative information. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 11, 92-107.
22 Wason, P. C.(1961). Response to affirmative and negative binary statements. British Journal of Psychology, 52, 133-142.
23 Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, R. A.(1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 162-185.

[1]	DENG Bilin, ZHANG Jijia. The Levels and Influencing Factors of the Illusion Conjunction in Chinese [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2020, 18(3): 289-296.
[2]	KONG Lingyue, ZHANG Bao. The Effect of Sub-Lexical Phonology on P200 in Chinese Word Recognition [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2020, 18(3): 304-310.
[3]	MA Lijun, LIANG Junyu, MA Yunxiao. Processing of Homophonic Chinese Two-Part Allegorical Sayings: Effects of Homophonies and Various Lengths of Time Intervals Between First and Second Parts [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2020, 18(3): 325-331.
[4]	HUANG Qi, XIN Ziqiang, AN Yuanyuan, ZHAO Yue. The Effect of PTSD Symptoms on Executive Function of Police Officers: Exploration Based on Stroop Paradigm [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2020, 18(2): 281-288.
[5]	LIU Yueyue, WANG Ruiming, LI Li, WU Limu. Phonological Activation of Non-Target Language During Unbalanced Chinese-English Bilinguals' Language Production [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2020, 18(1): 39-44.
[6]	GAO Xiaolei, SHEN Meng, LI Haiyan, BAI Xuejun, GAO Lei. An Eye Movement Study of Chinese Word Recognition of Tibetan Native Speakers [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2020, 18(1): 45-52.
[7]	ZHU Peng, CHANG Ruosong. Effects of Gender and Situational Hazard Level on Pedestrian Hazard Perception: Evidence from ERP [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2020, 18(1): 113-120.
[8]	GONG Zhenxing, ZHANG Ying, LI Xinmin, ZHANG Tiantian. Seeking Consensus can Find Differences: The Impact of the Heterogeneity of the Learning Goal Orientation Between Leader and Subordinate on Creativity [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2020, 18(1): 128-135.
[9]	ZENG Qing, ZHENG XiFu. The Time-course Difference of the Attention Paid by High Disgust Sensitivity and Low Disgust Sensitivity Individuals when Processing Different Emotional Pictures: An Event-related Potentials Study [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(6): 743-749.
[10]	MA Lijun, HAN Zhenyang. Recognition of Hierarchical Chinese Characters: The Role of Semantic Radical and Phonological Radical [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(6): 756-764.
[11]	ZHAO Liming, LIU Yiling. Inhibitory Control in Speech Production of Children Who Stutter: Evidence from a Verbal Go/Nogo Task [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(6): 780-786.
[12]	WANG Xiujuan, WANG Mengting, HAN Shangfeng, LIU Shen, ZHANG Lin. Help-seeking Under Risky Decision-making Framework: The Effect of Attachment Style [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(6): 840-845.
[13]	LIU Yan, ZHU Zhi, MA Xie. The Influence of Bilingual Experience on Executive Function [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(4): 452-460.
[14]	WU Guolai, ZHANG Jingjing, REN Fangyuan, YANG Jingjing, JIU Yanhong. Association Between Working Memory Capacity and Mind Wandering Frequency: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(4): 461-471.
[15]	WANG Meng, FAN Weiqiao, SHEN Ying. An Event-Related-Potential (ERP) Study of Global and Local Thinking Styles [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(4): 472-479.