Eye-Movement Suppression in the Visual World Paradigm.

Q1 Social Sciences Open Mind Pub Date : 2024-08-15 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1162/opmi_a_00157
Anna Laurinavichyute, Anastasia Ziubanova, Anastasiya Lopukhina
{"title":"Eye-Movement Suppression in the Visual World Paradigm.","authors":"Anna Laurinavichyute, Anastasia Ziubanova, Anastasiya Lopukhina","doi":"10.1162/opmi_a_00157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Eye movements in the visual world paradigm are known to depend not only on linguistic input but on such factors as task, pragmatic context, affordances, etc. However, the degree to which eye movements may depend on task rather than on linguistic input is unclear. The present study for the first time tests how task constraints modulate eye movement behavior in the visual world paradigm by probing whether participants could refrain from looking at the referred image. Across two experiments with and without comprehension questions (total <i>N</i> = 159), we found that when participants were instructed to avoid looking at the referred images, the probability of fixating these reduced from 58% to 18% while comprehension scores remained high. Although language-mediated eye movements could not be suppressed fully, the degree of possible decoupling of eye movements from language processing suggests that participants can withdraw at least some looks from the referred images when needed. If they do so to different degrees in different experimental conditions, comparisons between conditions might be compromised. We discuss some cases where participants could adopt different viewing behaviors depending on the experimental condition, and provide some tentative ways to test for such differences.</p>","PeriodicalId":32558,"journal":{"name":"Open Mind","volume":"8 ","pages":"1012-1036"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11338299/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Mind","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_a_00157","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Eye movements in the visual world paradigm are known to depend not only on linguistic input but on such factors as task, pragmatic context, affordances, etc. However, the degree to which eye movements may depend on task rather than on linguistic input is unclear. The present study for the first time tests how task constraints modulate eye movement behavior in the visual world paradigm by probing whether participants could refrain from looking at the referred image. Across two experiments with and without comprehension questions (total N = 159), we found that when participants were instructed to avoid looking at the referred images, the probability of fixating these reduced from 58% to 18% while comprehension scores remained high. Although language-mediated eye movements could not be suppressed fully, the degree of possible decoupling of eye movements from language processing suggests that participants can withdraw at least some looks from the referred images when needed. If they do so to different degrees in different experimental conditions, comparisons between conditions might be compromised. We discuss some cases where participants could adopt different viewing behaviors depending on the experimental condition, and provide some tentative ways to test for such differences.

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
视觉世界范式中的眼动抑制
众所周知,视觉世界范式中的眼球运动不仅取决于语言输入,还取决于任务、语用环境、承受能力等因素。然而,眼动在多大程度上取决于任务而不是语言输入还不清楚。本研究首次测试了任务限制如何调节视觉世界范式中的眼动行为,方法是探究参与者是否可以不看所指图像。在有理解问题和没有理解问题的两次实验中(总人数= 159),我们发现,当参与者被指示不要看参考图像时,固定这些图像的概率从 58% 降至 18%,而理解得分仍然很高。虽然以语言为媒介的眼球运动不能完全被抑制,但眼球运动与语言处理的可能解耦程度表明,参与者在需要时至少可以从参考图像上收回一些视线。如果他们在不同的实验条件下这样做的程度不同,那么不同条件下的比较可能会受到影响。我们讨论了参与者可能根据实验条件采取不同观看行为的一些情况,并提供了一些测试这种差异的初步方法。
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
Open Mind
Open Mind Social Sciences-Linguistics and Language
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
53 weeks
期刊最新文献
Approximating Human-Level 3D Visual Inferences With Deep Neural Networks. Prosodic Cues Support Inferences About the Question's Pedagogical Intent. The Double Standard of Ownership. Combination and Differentiation Theories of Categorization: A Comparison Using Participants' Categorization Descriptions. Investigating Sensitivity to Shared Information and Personal Experience in Children's Use of Majority Information.
×
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