Prediction in reading: A review of predictability effects, their theoretical implications, and beyond.

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Psychonomic Bulletin & Review Pub Date : 2024-10-31 DOI:10.3758/s13423-024-02588-z
Roslyn Wong, Erik D Reichle, Aaron Veldre
{"title":"Prediction in reading: A review of predictability effects, their theoretical implications, and beyond.","authors":"Roslyn Wong, Erik D Reichle, Aaron Veldre","doi":"10.3758/s13423-024-02588-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Historically, prediction during reading has been considered an inefficient and cognitively expensive processing mechanism given the inherently generative nature of language, which allows upcoming text to unfold in an infinite number of possible ways. This article provides an accessible and comprehensive review of the psycholinguistic research that, over the past 40 or so years, has investigated whether readers are capable of generating predictions during reading, typically via experiments on the effects of predictability (i.e., how well a word can be predicted from its prior context). Five theoretically important issues are addressed: What is the best measure of predictability? What is the functional relationship between predictability and processing difficulty? What stage(s) of processing does predictability affect? Are predictability effects ubiquitous? What processes do predictability effects actually reflect? Insights from computational models of reading about how predictability manifests itself to facilitate the reading of text are also discussed. This review concludes by arguing that effects of predictability can, to a certain extent, be taken as demonstrating evidence that prediction is an important but flexible component of real-time language comprehension, in line with broader predictive accounts of cognitive functioning. However, converging evidence, especially from concurrent eye-tracking and brain-imaging methods, is necessary to refine theories of prediction.</p>","PeriodicalId":20763,"journal":{"name":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-024-02588-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Historically, prediction during reading has been considered an inefficient and cognitively expensive processing mechanism given the inherently generative nature of language, which allows upcoming text to unfold in an infinite number of possible ways. This article provides an accessible and comprehensive review of the psycholinguistic research that, over the past 40 or so years, has investigated whether readers are capable of generating predictions during reading, typically via experiments on the effects of predictability (i.e., how well a word can be predicted from its prior context). Five theoretically important issues are addressed: What is the best measure of predictability? What is the functional relationship between predictability and processing difficulty? What stage(s) of processing does predictability affect? Are predictability effects ubiquitous? What processes do predictability effects actually reflect? Insights from computational models of reading about how predictability manifests itself to facilitate the reading of text are also discussed. This review concludes by arguing that effects of predictability can, to a certain extent, be taken as demonstrating evidence that prediction is an important but flexible component of real-time language comprehension, in line with broader predictive accounts of cognitive functioning. However, converging evidence, especially from concurrent eye-tracking and brain-imaging methods, is necessary to refine theories of prediction.

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
阅读预测:对可预测性效应、其理论意义及其他方面的回顾。
从历史上看,阅读过程中的预测一直被认为是一种效率低下、认知成本高昂的处理机制,因为语言本身具有生成性,它允许即将出现的文本以无限可能的方式展开。本文对过去 40 多年来研究读者是否能够在阅读过程中生成预测的心理语言学研究进行了通俗易懂的全面回顾,这些研究通常是通过对可预测性(即根据先前语境预测单词的效果)的影响进行实验来进行的。实验涉及五个重要的理论问题:预测性的最佳衡量标准是什么?可预测性和处理难度之间的功能关系是什么?可预测性会影响哪个(些)加工阶段?可预测性效应是否无处不在?可预测性效应实际上反映了哪些过程?此外,还讨论了阅读的计算模型对可预测性如何体现以促进文本阅读的启示。本综述最后认为,可预测性效应在一定程度上可以被视为证明预测是实时语言理解的一个重要但灵活的组成部分的证据,这与认知功能的广泛预测性描述是一致的。不过,要完善预测理论,还需要汇聚证据,特别是同时采用眼动追踪和脑成像方法的证据。
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
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.90%
发文量
165
期刊介绍: The journal provides coverage spanning a broad spectrum of topics in all areas of experimental psychology. The journal is primarily dedicated to the publication of theory and review articles and brief reports of outstanding experimental work. Areas of coverage include cognitive psychology broadly construed, including but not limited to action, perception, & attention, language, learning & memory, reasoning & decision making, and social cognition. We welcome submissions that approach these issues from a variety of perspectives such as behavioral measurements, comparative psychology, development, evolutionary psychology, genetics, neuroscience, and quantitative/computational modeling. We particularly encourage integrative research that crosses traditional content and methodological boundaries.
期刊最新文献
Lexical integration of novel words learned through natural reading. The mnemonic potency of functional facts. Shifting reliance between the internal and external world: A meta-analysis on visual-working memory use. Which "working memory" are we talking about? Complex span tasks versus N-back. The influence of shifts in visual perspective on emotion in event memories: A meta-analytical review.
×
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