新词的含蓄和辛酸吸收:相似的效率,但不同的机制?

IF 0.5 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Psychology-Journal of the Higher School of Economics Pub Date : 2023-06-30 DOI:10.17323/1813-8918-2023-2-370-385
Ekaterina I. Perikova, M. G. Filippova, Daria S. Gnedykh, D. N. Makarova, O. Shcherbakova, Yury Shtyrov
{"title":"新词的含蓄和辛酸吸收:相似的效率,但不同的机制?","authors":"Ekaterina I. Perikova, M. G. Filippova, Daria S. Gnedykh, D. N. Makarova, O. Shcherbakova, Yury Shtyrov","doi":"10.17323/1813-8918-2023-2-370-385","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Two language learning strategies have been described as common in both children and adults: fast mapping (FM), which promotes learning from context, and explicit encoding (EE), which is provided through direct instruction. Pre vious functional neuroimaging studies in adult learners have suggested differential neural mechanisms underlying these two major cognitive strategies, with some limited evidence in support of such differences also found in behavioural experiments. Nevertheless, the exact nature of these differences remains underinvestigated. Our goal was to explore putative differential effects of EE and FM strategies on the acquisition of novel words, with a focus on scrutinising the quality of recognition of newly learnt items. In two experiments, participants (total sample size = 82) learned 18 novel words presented ten times each in a word-picture association paradigm using EE and FM conditions. Learning outcomes were assessed immediately after the training using a recognition task. In both experiments, we found no differences in either the accuracy or the reaction time of word recognition between FM and EE conditions, which suggests similar behavioural efficiency of both strategies. However, we found a negative correlation between reaction time and response accuracy in recognising the words learned through EE, with no similar effects for FM, which indicates qualitative differences in underlying memory traces formed via these two acquisition modes. These results can be seen to imply that people tend to use information acquired through EE more confidently than that acquired through FM.","PeriodicalId":44468,"journal":{"name":"Psychology-Journal of the Higher School of Economics","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Имплицитное и эксплицитное усвоение новых слов: схожая эффективность, но разные механизмы?\",\"authors\":\"Ekaterina I. Perikova, M. G. Filippova, Daria S. Gnedykh, D. N. Makarova, O. Shcherbakova, Yury Shtyrov\",\"doi\":\"10.17323/1813-8918-2023-2-370-385\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Two language learning strategies have been described as common in both children and adults: fast mapping (FM), which promotes learning from context, and explicit encoding (EE), which is provided through direct instruction. Pre vious functional neuroimaging studies in adult learners have suggested differential neural mechanisms underlying these two major cognitive strategies, with some limited evidence in support of such differences also found in behavioural experiments. Nevertheless, the exact nature of these differences remains underinvestigated. Our goal was to explore putative differential effects of EE and FM strategies on the acquisition of novel words, with a focus on scrutinising the quality of recognition of newly learnt items. In two experiments, participants (total sample size = 82) learned 18 novel words presented ten times each in a word-picture association paradigm using EE and FM conditions. Learning outcomes were assessed immediately after the training using a recognition task. In both experiments, we found no differences in either the accuracy or the reaction time of word recognition between FM and EE conditions, which suggests similar behavioural efficiency of both strategies. However, we found a negative correlation between reaction time and response accuracy in recognising the words learned through EE, with no similar effects for FM, which indicates qualitative differences in underlying memory traces formed via these two acquisition modes. These results can be seen to imply that people tend to use information acquired through EE more confidently than that acquired through FM.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology-Journal of the Higher School of Economics\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology-Journal of the Higher School of Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2023-2-370-385\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology-Journal of the Higher School of Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2023-2-370-385","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

两种语言学习策略在儿童和成人中都很常见:快速映射(FM)和显性编码(EE),前者促进从语境中学习,后者通过直接教学提供。先前对成人学习者的功能神经成像研究表明,这两种主要认知策略背后的不同神经机制,在行为实验中也发现了一些支持这种差异的有限证据。然而,这些差异的确切性质仍未得到充分研究。我们的目标是探索情感表达和调频策略对新单词习得的不同影响,重点是审查对新学项目的识别质量。在两个实验中,参与者(总样本量为82人)学习了18个生词,每个生词在词-图联想范式中分别出现10次。学习结果在训练后立即通过识别任务进行评估。在这两个实验中,我们都没有发现FM和EE条件下单词识别的准确性和反应时间的差异,这表明两种策略的行为效率相似。然而,我们发现在识别通过情感表达学习的单词时,反应时间和反应准确性之间存在负相关,而在FM中没有类似的影响,这表明通过这两种习得模式形成的潜在记忆痕迹存在质的差异。这些结果可以看出,人们倾向于更自信地使用通过情感表达获得的信息,而不是通过FM获得的信息。
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
Имплицитное и эксплицитное усвоение новых слов: схожая эффективность, но разные механизмы?
Two language learning strategies have been described as common in both children and adults: fast mapping (FM), which promotes learning from context, and explicit encoding (EE), which is provided through direct instruction. Pre vious functional neuroimaging studies in adult learners have suggested differential neural mechanisms underlying these two major cognitive strategies, with some limited evidence in support of such differences also found in behavioural experiments. Nevertheless, the exact nature of these differences remains underinvestigated. Our goal was to explore putative differential effects of EE and FM strategies on the acquisition of novel words, with a focus on scrutinising the quality of recognition of newly learnt items. In two experiments, participants (total sample size = 82) learned 18 novel words presented ten times each in a word-picture association paradigm using EE and FM conditions. Learning outcomes were assessed immediately after the training using a recognition task. In both experiments, we found no differences in either the accuracy or the reaction time of word recognition between FM and EE conditions, which suggests similar behavioural efficiency of both strategies. However, we found a negative correlation between reaction time and response accuracy in recognising the words learned through EE, with no similar effects for FM, which indicates qualitative differences in underlying memory traces formed via these two acquisition modes. These results can be seen to imply that people tend to use information acquired through EE more confidently than that acquired through FM.
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
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics was established by the National Research University — Higher School of Economics (HSE) in 2004 and is administered by the School of Psychology of HSE. The Journal publishes articles written by Russian and foreign researchers presenting original positions in academic and applied psychology, analytical reviews, short reports focused on empirical studies, and information about current scientific events in Russia and the rest of the world. Principal themes of the journal include: -Methodology, history, and theory of psychology -Research approaches and methods in psychology -New tools for psychological assessment -Interdisciplinary studies connecting psychology with economics, sociology, cultural anthropology, and other sciences -New achievements and trends in cognitive psychology, social psychology, organizational psychology, neuroscience -Models and methods of practice in organizations and individual work -Studies in personological approach, combining theoretical, empirical, hermeneutic, and counselling work on personality -Bridging the gap between science and practice, psychological problems associated with innovations -Discussions on pressing issues in fundamental and applied research within psychology and related sciences The primary audience of the journal includes researchers and practitioners specializing in psychology, sociology, cultural studies, education, neuroscience, and management, as well as teachers and students of higher education institutions.
期刊最新文献
USING SUBJECTIVE REPORT RATING SCALES TO REVEAL BASIC PROCESSES UNDERLYING INSIGHT SOLUTIONS IN ANAGRAM TASKS WHAT IS A PROBLEM IN THE PSYCHOLOGY OF THINKING AND WHY IS IT NEEDED A STUDY OF CORRELATIONS BETWEEN NEWBORN CHILDREN OUTCOMES AND EMOTIONAL STATES AND ATTACHMENT TO A FETUS IN WOMEN PREGNANT USING IN-VITRO FERTILIZATION От чего зависят профессиональные планы старших школьников? EMBODIED PROBLEM SOLVING: A REVIEW OF EXPERIMENTAL PARADIGMS
×
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