Expecting the unexpected: Examining the interplay between real-world knowledge and contextual cues during language comprehension.

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Memory & Cognition Pub Date : 2025-02-06 DOI:10.3758/s13421-025-01689-x
Chengjie Jiang, Ruth Filik
{"title":"Expecting the unexpected: Examining the interplay between real-world knowledge and contextual cues during language comprehension.","authors":"Chengjie Jiang, Ruth Filik","doi":"10.3758/s13421-025-01689-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Communication frequently involves discussions about real-world implausible events. Since most prior research used specific contextual cues to indicate a strong bias towards real-world knowledge violations, it remains unclear how real-world and contextual knowledge interact when the context is relatively unconstraining (e.g., dream scenarios), where both plausible and implausible information is supported. We investigated this issue using sentence completion (Experiment 1) and self-paced reading tasks (Experiment 2). Results of Experiment 1 showed that comprehenders were guided by the dream context to expect less plausible information in a general way, but their expectations were still largely constrained by real-world knowledge. Results of Experiment 2 showed that although comprehension in such contexts was initially guided by real-world knowledge, plausible information became more difficult to comprehend than implausible information (e.g., \"putting meat and vegetables in the refrigerator<sub>plausible</sub>/wardrobe<sub>implausible</sub>\") at the final regions of the target sentence. Our study is the first to show that context is powerful enough to guide comprehenders towards expecting world knowledge violations even without explicit constraints indicating this bias, which is mainly driven by increased comprehension difficulties for plausible contents rather than decreased difficulties for implausible ones. Importantly, our findings raise new questions about how comprehenders switch from an old situation model to a new one. They also indicate necessary extensions for language comprehension models, highlighting that information unrelated to both real-world and contextual knowledge in any direct way (i.e., information with extremely low cloze probability) can still be ultimately preferred in certain contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":48398,"journal":{"name":"Memory & Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory & Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-025-01689-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Communication frequently involves discussions about real-world implausible events. Since most prior research used specific contextual cues to indicate a strong bias towards real-world knowledge violations, it remains unclear how real-world and contextual knowledge interact when the context is relatively unconstraining (e.g., dream scenarios), where both plausible and implausible information is supported. We investigated this issue using sentence completion (Experiment 1) and self-paced reading tasks (Experiment 2). Results of Experiment 1 showed that comprehenders were guided by the dream context to expect less plausible information in a general way, but their expectations were still largely constrained by real-world knowledge. Results of Experiment 2 showed that although comprehension in such contexts was initially guided by real-world knowledge, plausible information became more difficult to comprehend than implausible information (e.g., "putting meat and vegetables in the refrigeratorplausible/wardrobeimplausible") at the final regions of the target sentence. Our study is the first to show that context is powerful enough to guide comprehenders towards expecting world knowledge violations even without explicit constraints indicating this bias, which is mainly driven by increased comprehension difficulties for plausible contents rather than decreased difficulties for implausible ones. Importantly, our findings raise new questions about how comprehenders switch from an old situation model to a new one. They also indicate necessary extensions for language comprehension models, highlighting that information unrelated to both real-world and contextual knowledge in any direct way (i.e., information with extremely low cloze probability) can still be ultimately preferred in certain contexts.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Memory & Cognition
Memory & Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
112
期刊介绍: Memory & Cognition covers human memory and learning, conceptual processes, psycholinguistics, problem solving, thinking, decision making, and skilled performance, including relevant work in the areas of computer simulation, information processing, mathematical psychology, developmental psychology, and experimental social psychology.
期刊最新文献
Examining the semantic relatedness effect on working memory with ad hoc categories. Expecting the unexpected: Examining the interplay between real-world knowledge and contextual cues during language comprehension. Temporal attention modulates distraction resistance of visual working memory representations. The impact of cross-language co-activation of cognates on bilingual performance on the reading span task. Does expecting external memory support cost recognition memory?
×
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