重新审视具体性效应:英语单词的形式和具体程度之间的非任意映射影响词汇加工。

IF 2.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognition Pub Date : 2024-10-09 DOI:10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105972
Elaine Kearney , Katie L. McMahon , Frank Guenther , Joanne Arciuli , Greig I. de Zubicaray
{"title":"重新审视具体性效应:英语单词的形式和具体程度之间的非任意映射影响词汇加工。","authors":"Elaine Kearney ,&nbsp;Katie L. McMahon ,&nbsp;Frank Guenther ,&nbsp;Joanne Arciuli ,&nbsp;Greig I. de Zubicaray","doi":"10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105972","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>How do we represent and process abstract and concrete concepts? The “concreteness effect”, in which words with more concrete meanings are processed more quickly and accurately across a range of language tasks compared to abstract ones, suggests a differential conceptual organization of these words in the brain. However, concrete words tend to be marked by specific phonotactic features, such as having fewer syllables and more phonological neighbours. It is unclear whether these non-arbitrary form-meaning relationships that systematically denote the concreteness of a word impact language processing. In the current study, we first establish the extent of systematic mappings between phonological/phonetic features and concreteness ratings in a large set of monosyllabic and polysyllabic English words (i.e., concreteness form typicality), then demonstrate that they significantly influence lexical processing using behavioural megastudy datasets. Surface form features predicted a significant proportion of variance in concreteness ratings of monomorphemic words (25 %) which increased with the addition of polymorphemic forms (43 %). In addition, concreteness form typicality was a significant predictor of performance on visual and auditory lexical decision, naming, and semantic (concrete/abstract) decision tasks, after controlling for a range of psycholinguistic variables and concreteness ratings. Overall, our results provide the first evidence that concreteness form typicality influences lexical processing. We discuss theoretical implications for interpretations of the concreteness effect and models of language processing that have yet to incorporate non-arbitrary relationships between form and meaning into their feature sets.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48455,"journal":{"name":"Cognition","volume":"254 ","pages":"Article 105972"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revisiting the concreteness effect: Non-arbitrary mappings between form and concreteness of English words influence lexical processing\",\"authors\":\"Elaine Kearney ,&nbsp;Katie L. McMahon ,&nbsp;Frank Guenther ,&nbsp;Joanne Arciuli ,&nbsp;Greig I. de Zubicaray\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105972\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>How do we represent and process abstract and concrete concepts? The “concreteness effect”, in which words with more concrete meanings are processed more quickly and accurately across a range of language tasks compared to abstract ones, suggests a differential conceptual organization of these words in the brain. However, concrete words tend to be marked by specific phonotactic features, such as having fewer syllables and more phonological neighbours. It is unclear whether these non-arbitrary form-meaning relationships that systematically denote the concreteness of a word impact language processing. In the current study, we first establish the extent of systematic mappings between phonological/phonetic features and concreteness ratings in a large set of monosyllabic and polysyllabic English words (i.e., concreteness form typicality), then demonstrate that they significantly influence lexical processing using behavioural megastudy datasets. Surface form features predicted a significant proportion of variance in concreteness ratings of monomorphemic words (25 %) which increased with the addition of polymorphemic forms (43 %). In addition, concreteness form typicality was a significant predictor of performance on visual and auditory lexical decision, naming, and semantic (concrete/abstract) decision tasks, after controlling for a range of psycholinguistic variables and concreteness ratings. Overall, our results provide the first evidence that concreteness form typicality influences lexical processing. We discuss theoretical implications for interpretations of the concreteness effect and models of language processing that have yet to incorporate non-arbitrary relationships between form and meaning into their feature sets.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognition\",\"volume\":\"254 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105972\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027724002580\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027724002580","RegionNum":1,"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

摘要

我们如何表示和处理抽象和具体概念?具体词义效应 "表明,在一系列语言任务中,具体词义的词语比抽象词义的词语处理得更快、更准确。然而,具体词语往往具有特定的语音战术特征,如音节较少、音素邻接较多。目前还不清楚这些非任意性的形义关系是否会对语言加工产生影响。在本研究中,我们首先在一大批单音节和多音节英语单词中建立了语音/音素特征与具体程度评级之间的系统映射关系(即具体程度形式典型性),然后利用行为大研究数据集证明了它们对词汇加工的显著影响。表面形式特征预示了单音节词具体词性评分的很大一部分差异(25%),而随着多音节形式的增加,这一比例也随之增加(43%)。此外,在控制了一系列心理语言学变量和具体词性评分之后,具体词性形式的典型性对视觉和听觉词汇决策、命名和语义(具体/抽象)决策任务的成绩有显著的预测作用。总之,我们的研究结果首次证明了具体形式的典型性会影响词汇加工。我们讨论了对具体性效应的解释和语言加工模型的理论意义,这些模型尚未将形式和意义之间的非任意关系纳入其特征集。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Revisiting the concreteness effect: Non-arbitrary mappings between form and concreteness of English words influence lexical processing
How do we represent and process abstract and concrete concepts? The “concreteness effect”, in which words with more concrete meanings are processed more quickly and accurately across a range of language tasks compared to abstract ones, suggests a differential conceptual organization of these words in the brain. However, concrete words tend to be marked by specific phonotactic features, such as having fewer syllables and more phonological neighbours. It is unclear whether these non-arbitrary form-meaning relationships that systematically denote the concreteness of a word impact language processing. In the current study, we first establish the extent of systematic mappings between phonological/phonetic features and concreteness ratings in a large set of monosyllabic and polysyllabic English words (i.e., concreteness form typicality), then demonstrate that they significantly influence lexical processing using behavioural megastudy datasets. Surface form features predicted a significant proportion of variance in concreteness ratings of monomorphemic words (25 %) which increased with the addition of polymorphemic forms (43 %). In addition, concreteness form typicality was a significant predictor of performance on visual and auditory lexical decision, naming, and semantic (concrete/abstract) decision tasks, after controlling for a range of psycholinguistic variables and concreteness ratings. Overall, our results provide the first evidence that concreteness form typicality influences lexical processing. We discuss theoretical implications for interpretations of the concreteness effect and models of language processing that have yet to incorporate non-arbitrary relationships between form and meaning into their feature sets.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cognition
Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
283
期刊介绍: Cognition is an international journal that publishes theoretical and experimental papers on the study of the mind. It covers a wide variety of subjects concerning all the different aspects of cognition, ranging from biological and experimental studies to formal analysis. Contributions from the fields of psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, computer science, mathematics, ethology and philosophy are welcome in this journal provided that they have some bearing on the functioning of the mind. In addition, the journal serves as a forum for discussion of social and political aspects of cognitive science.
期刊最新文献
The role of exceptions in children's and adults' judgments about generic statements. Partisan language in a polarized world: In-group language provides reputational benefits to speakers while polarizing audiences. What's left of the leftward bias in scene viewing? Lateral asymmetries in information processing during early search guidance. Language enables the acquisition of distinct sensorimotor memories for speech. Morality on the road: Should machine drivers be more utilitarian than human drivers?
×
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