Five degrees of (non)sense: Investigating the connection between bullshit receptivity and susceptibility to semantic illusions

Dario Paape
{"title":"Five degrees of (non)sense: Investigating the connection between bullshit receptivity and susceptibility to semantic illusions","authors":"Dario Paape","doi":"10.3765/elm.2.5369","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Individual differences in people’s tendency to see bullshit statements such as Perceptual reality transcends subtle truth as meaningful and possibly profound have become an active topic of research in judgment and decision making in recent years. However, (psycho)linguistics has so far paid little attention to the topic, despite its obvious appeal for language processing research. I present an experiment that investigated possible shared traits contributing to individual bullshit receptivity and susceptibility to semantic illusions, which occur when compositionally incongruous sentences receive plausible but unlicensed interpretations (e.g., More people have been to Russia than I have). The results show relatively little indication of an individual-level tendency to both fall for bullshit and for linguistic illusions. Implications for future psycholinguistic research into bullshit processing are discussed.","PeriodicalId":154565,"journal":{"name":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3765/elm.2.5369","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Individual differences in people’s tendency to see bullshit statements such as Perceptual reality transcends subtle truth as meaningful and possibly profound have become an active topic of research in judgment and decision making in recent years. However, (psycho)linguistics has so far paid little attention to the topic, despite its obvious appeal for language processing research. I present an experiment that investigated possible shared traits contributing to individual bullshit receptivity and susceptibility to semantic illusions, which occur when compositionally incongruous sentences receive plausible but unlicensed interpretations (e.g., More people have been to Russia than I have). The results show relatively little indication of an individual-level tendency to both fall for bullshit and for linguistic illusions. Implications for future psycholinguistic research into bullshit processing are discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
五度(非)感觉:调查胡扯接受度和对语义幻觉的敏感性之间的联系
近年来,人们倾向于将诸如“感知现实超越微妙真理”之类的废话视为有意义且可能深刻的个体差异,已成为判断和决策领域的一个活跃研究课题。然而,迄今为止,(心理)语言学对这个话题的关注很少,尽管它对语言处理研究有明显的吸引力。我提出了一个实验,调查了可能导致个人接受胡扯和对语义错觉敏感的共同特征,当组成不协调的句子得到看似合理但未经许可的解释时,就会发生这种情况(例如,去过俄罗斯的人比我多)。研究结果显示,相对而言,几乎没有迹象表明,在个人层面上,人们倾向于相信胡扯和语言错觉。讨论了对未来心理语言学研究的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The rise and particularly fall of presuppositions: Evidence from duality in universals Reading times show effects of contextual complexity and uncertainty in comprehension of German universal quantifiers Five degrees of (non)sense: Investigating the connection between bullshit receptivity and susceptibility to semantic illusions Real-time processing of indexical and generic expressions: Insights from, and implications for, COVID-related public health messages Semantics of Non-Doxastic Attitude Ascriptions from Experimental Perspective
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1