PSY 369: Psycholinguistics

PSY 369: Psycholinguistics
Language Comprehension: Meaning beyond the word

Announcements Homework 5 (a or b) deadline extended to April 5

Comprehension roadmap
This week: Comprehension of Sentence Meaning Traditional view: Propositions New view: Embodied representations Comprehension in Discourse

Propositions How do we represent sentence meaning? Propositions
Two or more concepts (arguments) with a relationship (relations) between them Arguments – particular times, places, people, objects, etc. (nouns) Relations - May be used for any kind (e.g., actions, attributes, positions, class memberships) Smallest unit of knowledge that can be judged as true or false Complex sentences consist of combinations of smaller propositional units Uses concepts from logic and linguistics to describe meaning

Propositions A mouse bit a cat How do we represent sentence meaning?
Two or more concepts with a relationship between them A mouse bit a cat bit (mouse, cat) mouse bit cat agent patient relation Can represent this within a network framework

Deriving Propositions
More complex example: Children who are slow eat bread that is cold Slow children Children eat bread Bread is cold relation subject time Slow Children Past Eat Cold Bread

Evidence for propositions
Bransford and Franks (1971, 1972) Ratcliff and McKoon (1978)

Bransford and Franks (1971, 1972) Study-Recognition Test Task Read sets of sentences, answered a question about each, later presented sentences and asked whether they were new (not previously presented) or old (previously presented) The girl broke the window on the porch. Broke what? The hill was steep. What was? The cat, running from the barking dog, jumped on the table. From what? The tree was tall. Was what? The old car climbed the hill. Did what? The cat running from the dog jumped on the table. Where? The girl who lives next door broke the window on the porch. Lives where? …

Bransford and Franks (1971, 1972) Study-Recognition Test Task All of the sentence came from 4 complex sentences. The full complex sentences were not presented at study. e.g., The girl who lives next door broke the large window on the porch … The girl lives next door. The girl broke the window. The window was on the porch. The window was large.

Bransford and Franks (1971, 1972) Study-Recognition Test Task Test: Old - same sentences that were presented at study New - based on the propositions in the complex sentence, but not presented at study (including the full complex sentences) Noncase - based on new propositions not based on the complex sentences (mixing of propositions across the different situations)

Bransford and Franks (1971, 1972) Study-Recognition Test Task Results: False recognition of sentences that they were not previously presented with Accurate rejections of noncases (different propositions) Unable to distinguish between the old and new cases that came from the same complex sentences Recognition confidence Yes 5 fours threes twos ones   noncases # of propositions Yes 4 Yes 3 Yes 1 Yes 2 No 2 No 3 No 4 No 1 No 5 ★ new old

Bransford and Franks (1971, 1972) Study-Recognition Test Task Conclusions: Participants remembered the basic meaning (propositions) Participants spontaneously combined the propositions into larger units Recognition confidence Yes 5 fours threes twos ones   noncases # of propositions Yes 4 Yes 3 Yes 1 Yes 2 No 2 No 3 No 4 No 1 No 5 ★ new old

Ratcliff and McKoon (1978) Tested 3 hypotheses: Sentences stored as single unit Sentences stored as connected propositions Sentences stored verbatim

Ratcliff and McKoon (1978) Study-Recognition Test Task Read sets of 4 unrelated sentences, then presented words (one at a time) and asked whether the words were in the preceding sentences Dependent Measure: Priming - manipulated the order of the words at test The mausoleum that enshrined the tsar overlooked the square. The clutch failed to engage. The beggar forgave injustice but resented hunger. Satire hurt the incumbent. hunger Y Saturn N square Y mausoleum Y beetle N

Ratcliff and McKoon (1978) Involves two propositions: P1 [OVERLOOK, MAUSOLEUM, SQUARE] P2 [ENSHRINE, MAUSOLEUM, TSAR]. The mausoleum that enshrined the tsar overlooked the square. The clutch failed to engage. The beggar forgave injustice but resented hunger. Satire hurt the incumbent.

Ratcliff and McKoon (1978) Predictions (if Hypothesis 2: propositions are the memory representation): If prime word from the same sentence, then should respond faster If prime word from the same proposition, then should respond faster than if from a different proposition (within the same sentence) The mausoleum that enshrined the tsar overlooked the square. The clutch failed to engage. square clutch Across sentences Between two propositions in the same sentence square tsar square mausoleum Within a single proposition

Ratcliff and McKoon (1978) Predictions (if Hypothesis 2: propositions are the memory representation): If prime word from the same sentence, then should respond faster If prime word from the same proposition, then should respond faster than if from a different proposition (within the same sentence) **111 msec **91 msec Results 671 580 560 square clutch square tsar square mausoleum Within a single proposition Across sentences Between two propositions in the same sentence

Ratcliff and McKoon (1978) Predictions (if Hypothesis 2: propositions are the memory representation): If prime word from the same sentence, then should respond faster If prime word from the same proposition, then should respond faster than if from a different proposition (within the same sentence) **20 msec Notes: 1) The authors ruled out the verbatim hypothesis by systematically comparing words that were close versus far (but controlling for within/between proposition). They found no differences, suggesting that the surface information was not a factor (consistent with the Sachs results discussed earlier) 2) the effect (74 msec) gets even larger when a longer delay (20 mins) is introduced between the sentences and the recognition task Results 671 580 560 square clutch square tsar square mausoleum Within a single proposition Across sentences Between two propositions in the same sentence

Ratcliff and McKoon (1978) Predictions (if Hypothesis 2: propositions are the memory representation): If prime word from the same sentence, then should respond faster If prime word from the same proposition, then should respond faster than if from a different proposition (within the same sentence) Conclusions Support the hypothesis that propositions are used to organize our memories of sentences

Inference in comprehension
Not all propositions come from the bottom-up Elaboration - integration of new information with information from long term memory Memory for the new information improves as it is integrated Inferences - a proposition (or other representation) drawn by the comprehender From LTM, not directly from the input

Bransford, and colleagues (1972, 73) We draw inferences in the course of understanding new events. The inferences get encoded into our memory of the events. e.g., drawing inferences of instruments

Bransford, and colleagues (1972, 73) Saw (or heard): John was trying to fix the birdhouse. He was looking for the nail when his father came out to watch him and to help him do the work. Tested: John was using the hammer to fix the birdhouse when his father came out to watch him and to help him do the work. was not mentioned in the text, but was inferred Result: Participants falsely believed that they had heard this sentence So memory is not only of propositions in the original sentence, but may also include additional propositions that may have been inferred

Arguments against propositions
Propositions are symbolic and amodal Referential problem: Disconnected with outside world (symbols referring to other symbols) Implementation problem: Has been very difficult to develop a propositional parser Lack of scientific productivity: More work on what you can do with propositions than is there evidence of the psychological reality of propositions Lack of a biological foundation: How do biological (or neurological) data constrain propositions The referential problem: Symbols are encapsulated: they only refer to other symbols, in a recursive network. Symbols are not grounded to perceptual, motor, or emotional experience. The implementation problem: There is no fully automatic parser that is capable to translate a plain text into a propositional codes (or any other symbolic code) Is this a temporary "technical" problem that will be solved sooner or later? or Is it a substantial problem for symbolists? The lack of scientific productivity: Symbolists do not feel interested in exploring meaning empirically, nor demonstrate their "psychological reality". They seem more interested in demonstrating the formal sufficiency of symbols (e.g., computability), than producing testable hypotheses. The lack of a biological foundation: Symbolist theories have their roots in logic, philosophy, or computer sciences. Symbolist theories are scarcely constrained by biological data (e.g., evolutionary), or neurological data.

More than propositions
Barclay (1973) Subjects are presented with sequences of sentences that create a spatial array, like: The bear is to the left of the moose. The moose is to the right of the lion. The moose is to the left of the cow. The lion is to the left of the bear. Array: lion < bear < moose < cow Subjects are asked either to remember the sentences or to remember the order Afterwards, people asked to remember the array also ‘remember’ sentences they didn’t actually hear, such as: The bear is to the left of the cow (also faster to verify, Potts, 1974)

More than propositions
Bransford, Barclay, and Franks (1972) Hear: There is a tree with a box beside it, and a chair is on top of the box. The box is to the right of the tree. The tree is green and extremely tall. (a): The tree is to the left of the chair. (b): The chair is to the left of the tree. Recognition Task Result: correctly rejected (b) but accepted (a)

Mental model Mental Models Hear: There is a tree with a box beside it, and a chair is on top of the box. The box is to the right of the tree. The tree is green and extremely tall. These experiments suggested that contexts are not simply lists of propositions, but that these propositions are somehow ‘merged’ to create `world-like’ representations Johnson-Laird (1983): While processing, humans construct representations of worlds/situations related (identical with?) those built from perception

Embodiment in language
Embodied Representations Many researchers assume that cognition is “embodied” (or “grounded”) rather than “abstract” (e.g., Barsalou, 2008) Activates representations associated with the body and actions Theoretical proposals from many disciplines Linguistics: Lakoff, Langacker, Talmy Neuroscience: Damasio, Edelman Cognitive psychology: Barsalou, Gibbs, Glenberg, MacWhinney, Zwaan Computer science: Steels, Feldman

Embodied Representations Much of this work argues that language is embodied (e.g., Barsalou, 2008; Glenberg, 2008; Zwaan & Taylor, 2006) Perceptual and motor systems play a central role in language production and comprehension (and meaning/concepts) Words and sentences are usually grounded to perceptual, motoric, and emotional experiences. In absence of immediate sensory-motor referents, words and sentences refer to mental models or simulations of experience Brain activity Comprehension and images Concrete words Action words activate motor representations Words activate areas in the brain overlapping with those areas involved in perception and action. Understanding texts describing spatial situations activates visuospatial representations. Understanding concrete words activate visual representions of shape, orientation, etc. Understanding texts describing actions and movements, activates motoric representations. Understanding emotional texts activate emotional representations

Embodied Representations Simulation hypothesis (Gallese, 2008) Simulation exploits some of the same neural structures activated during performance, perception, imagining, memory… Language gives us enough information to simulate Processing (producing or comprehending) walk involves the use of representations involved in the act of walking Brain activity Comprehension and images Concrete words Action words activate motor representations Words activate areas in the brain overlapping with those areas involved in perception and action. Understanding texts describing spatial situations activates visuospatial representations. Understanding concrete words activate visual representions of shape, orientation, etc. Understanding texts describing actions and movements, activates motoric representations. Understanding emotional texts activate emotional representations producing or comprehending “walk”

Evidence for Embodied Representations Stanfied & Zwaan (2001) Presented participants with sentences John put the pencil in the cup. John put the pencil in the drawer See a picture and ask “does this describe what you read about?” Brain activity Comprehension and images Concrete words Action words activate motor representations Words activate areas in the brain overlapping with those areas involved in perception and action. Understanding texts describing spatial situations activates visuospatial representations. Understanding concrete words activate visual representions of shape, orientation, etc. Understanding texts describing actions and movements, activates motoric representations. Understanding emotional texts activate emotional representations Results: faster at saying horizontal pencil with drawer and vertical pencil with cup

Evidence for Embodied Representations Zwaan et al (2004) Presented participants with a sentence A: The pitcher hurled the softball at you. B: You hurled the softball at the pitcher. See two pictures and ask “are these pictures the same object” Brain activity Comprehension and images Concrete words Action words activate motor representations Words activate areas in the brain overlapping with those areas involved in perception and action. Understanding texts describing spatial situations activates visuospatial representations. Understanding concrete words activate visual representions of shape, orientation, etc. Understanding texts describing actions and movements, activates motoric representations. Understanding emotional texts activate emotional representations A B Results: faster at saying ‘Yes’ when sentence matched the pictures (e.g., sentence A and pictures in A, if the ball is small and then gets big, it is coming towards you)

Evidence for Embodied Representations Hauk et al (2004) Do action words activate the motor cortex? fMRI study 50 words from 3 semantic subcategories (words matched for freq, length, imageability, etc.) Rated for whether words reminded them of face, arm, or leg Brain activity Comprehension and images Concrete words Action words activate motor representations Words activate areas in the brain overlapping with those areas involved in perception and action. Understanding texts describing spatial situations activates visuospatial representations. Understanding concrete words activate visual representions of shape, orientation, etc. Understanding texts describing actions and movements, activates motoric representations. Understanding emotional texts activate emotional representations Movement Comparison: moved their foot, finger, or tongue

Evidence for Embodied Representations Hauk et al (2004) Do action words activate the motor cortex? fMRI study Brain activity Comprehension and images Concrete words Action words activate motor representations Words activate areas in the brain overlapping with those areas involved in perception and action. Understanding texts describing spatial situations activates visuospatial representations. Understanding concrete words activate visual representions of shape, orientation, etc. Understanding texts describing actions and movements, activates motoric representations. Understanding emotional texts activate emotional representations Action words did activate some of the same areas as the movements

Summing up Traditional Embodiment of Meaning Cognition = Computation
Representation by propositions Propositions are abstract relations Embodiment of Meaning Cognition is serving perception and actions Representation = Patterns of possible bodily interactions with the world (lawfully related to the world) What an object, event, sentence means for you, is what you can do with the object, event, sentence.

Summing up The results of sentence comprehension are meaning representations Some debate over what these representations are Whatever they are, they get integrated with each other and with existing knowledge from LTM

Discourse Psycholinguistics
Traditional Psycholinguistics Determining what happens when we understand sentences Broader View How we resolve/understand sentences against the current discourse representation Sentence comprehension is a process that anchors the interpretation of the sentence to the representation of the prior text

Processing Discourse What is discourse?
The ways that we process (i.e., comprehend and remember) units of language larger than a sentence Lectures, personal narratives, expository discourse Units of analysis larger than a sentence Applies to both spoken and written forms Each situation has its own characteristics, the focus here is on some of the similarities across the different formats. Discourse processing is sort of like syntactic processing – a way of organizing/connecting the different pieces in to larger chunks. Here the chunks are larger than sentences.

Bill and Ted traveled through time and space.
Bill asked, “Dude, did you find him?” “Yeah, Bach was in the music store, but I haven’t found Abe yet. Dude, you should hear him play, he rocks!” “Excellent! Man, we’ve got to get these dudes back to school before we get there.”

To whom does “him” refer to?
Bill and Ted traveled through time and space. Bill asked, “Dude, did you find him?” “Yeah, Bach was in the music store, but I haven’t found Abe yet. Dude, you should hear him play, he rocks!” “Excellent! Man, we’ve got to get these dudes back to school before we get there.” To whom does “him” refer to?

To whom does “him” refer? Bach
Bill and Ted traveled through time and space. Bill asked, “Dude, did you find him?” “Yeah, Bach was in the music store, but I haven’t found Abe yet. Dude, you should hear him play, he rocks!” “Excellent! Man, we’ve got to get these dudes back to school before we get there.” To whom does “him” refer? Bach

To whom does this “him” refer?
Bill and Ted traveled through time and space. Bill asked, “Dude, did you find him?” “Yeah, Bach was in the music store, but I haven’t found Abe yet. Dude, you should hear him play, he rocks!” “Excellent! Man, we’ve got to get these dudes back to school before we get there.” To whom does this “him” refer?

To whom does this “him” refer? Bach again
Bill and Ted traveled through time and space. Bill asked, “Dude, did you find him?” “Yeah, Bach was in the music store, but I haven’t found Abe yet. Dude, you should hear him play, he rocks!” “Excellent! Man, we’ve got to get these dudes back to school before we get there.” To whom does this “him” refer? Bach again

To whom does this “him” refer? Bach again
Bill and Ted traveled through time and space. Bill asked, “Dude, did you find him?” “Yeah, Bach was in the music store, but I haven’t found Abe yet. Dude, you should hear him play, he rocks!” “Excellent! Man, we’ve got to get these dudes back to school before we get there.” To whom does this “him” refer? Bach again Why not Abe?

Huh!? Bill and Ted traveled through time and space.
Bill asked, “Dude, did you find him?” “Yeah, Bach was in the music store, but I haven’t found Abe yet. Dude, you should hear him play, he rocks!” “Excellent! Man, we’ve got to get these dudes back to school before we get there.” Huh!?

Oh yeah, they’re time travelers.
Bill and Ted traveled through time and space. Bill asked, “Dude, did you find him?” “Yeah, Bach was in the music store, but I haven’t found Abe yet. Dude, you should hear him play, he rocks!” “Excellent! Man, we’ve got to get these dudes back to school before we get there.” Huh!? Oh yeah, they’re time travelers.

Characteristics of Discourse
Local Structure (microstructure): The relationship between individual sentences Cohesion Coherence Global Structure (macrostructure): The relationship between the sentences and our knowledge of the world

Local Structure (microstructure): The relationship between individual sentences Cohesion Does the discourse “stick together”? Interpretation of one sentence depends on other sentences? Coherence Does the passage make sense? Logical consistency and semantic continuity?

Cohesion: Interpretation of one sentence depends on other sentences Referential Cohesion “Dude, you should hear him play…” Substitution Cohesion “We’ve got to get these dudes back to …” And many more Ellipsis, conjunction, lexical cohesion (See pg 160 of textbook for examples) The relationship between the referring expression and the antecedent create referential cohesion of discourse Reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction, lexical (reiteration, synonym, hyponymy) Referring expression, “him” “these dudes” Antecedent, the thing that they refer to “Bach” “Bach and Abe” Consider the following: Lexical: There was only one adult in the room. The grownup felt isolated. Substitution: Jean was the only adult in the room. She hoped another one would show up. Ellipsis: Jean was the only adult in the room. She hoped another would show up.

Types of Referential Cohesion
Anaphoric Reference Using an expression to refer back to something previously mentioned in discourse “…Bach was in the music store …” “Dude, you should hear him play, he rocks.” Cataphoric Reference Using an expression to refer forward to something that is coming up in discourse Dude, did you find him?” “Yeah, Bach was in the music store...”

Comprehending Anaphoric References
Daneman and Carpenter (1980) Task: Reading a passage and answer questions about the referents of pronouns Sitting with Richie, Archie, Walter and the rest of my gang in the Grill yesterday, I began to feel uneasy. Robbie had put a dime in the juke box. It was blaring one of the latest “Rock and Roll” favorites. I was studying, in horror, the reactions of my friends to the music. I was especially perturbed by the expression on my best friend’s face. Wayne looked intense and was pounding the table furiously to the beat. Now, I like most of the things other teenage boys like. I like girls with soft blonde hair, girls with dark curly hair, in fact all girls. I like milkshakes, football games and beach parties. I like denim jeans, fancy T-shirts and sneakers. It is not that I dislike rock music but I think it is supposed to be fun and not taken too seriously. And here he was, “all shook up” and serious over the crazy music. Question: Who was “all shook up” and serious over the music?

Daneman and Carpenter (1980) Task: Reading a passage and answer questions about the referents of pronouns Sitting with Richie, Archie, Walter and the rest of my gang in the Grill yesterday, I began to feel uneasy. Robbie had put a dime in the juke box. It was blaring one of the latest “Rock and Roll” favorites. I was studying, in horror, the reactions of my friends to the music. I was especially perturbed by the expression on my best friend’s face. Wayne looked intense and was pounding the table furiously to the beat. Now, I like most of the things other teenage boys like. I like girls with soft blonde hair, girls with dark curly hair, in fact all girls. I like milkshakes, football games and beach parties. I like denim jeans, fancy T-shirts and sneakers. It is not that I dislike rock music but I think it is supposed to be fun and not taken too seriously. And here he was, “all shook up” and serious over the crazy music. Question: Who was “all shook up” and serious over the music? Reading Span Test Smaller reading spans = smaller working memory capacity Manipulated how many sentences intervened between the pronoun ‘he’ and the antecedent ‘Wayne’

Daneman and Carpenter (1980) Conclusions: The number of intervening sentences don’t matter for high span people, but does for low span Results

Coherence: Given/new distinction Readers expect speakers to provide cues as to what information is old (already known by the listener) and what is new (not known) Making Inferences Filling in missing pieces of information to maintain coherence Haviland and Clark (1974) Singer, Halldorson, Lear, & Andrusiak (1992)

Developing coherence Haviland and Clark (1974)
Process of understanding a sentence in discourse context involves 3 stages: Identify the given and new info in the current sentence Find an antecedent in memory for the given information Attach the new information to this spot in memory

Task: Press a button when you understand the sentence. We got some beer out of the trunk. The beer was warm.

Task: Press a button when you understand the sentence. We got some beer out of the trunk. The beer was warm. Definite article “The” signals that “The beer” is given information

Task: Press a button when you understand the sentence. We got some beer out of the trunk. The beer was warm. Definite article “The” signals that “The beer” is given information Connect the new information “was warm” to the appropriate discourse concept “some beer” This process is called Direct Matching

Developing coherence Haviland and Clark (1974) World knowledge
Task: Press a button when you understand the sentence. We checked the picnic supplies. The beer was warm. Definite article “The” signals that “The beer” is given information Connect the new information “was warm” to the appropriate discourse concept “??”

Developing coherence Haviland and Clark (1974) World knowledge
Task: Press a button when you understand the sentence. We checked the picnic supplies. The beer was warm. Definite article “The” signals that “The beer” is given information Connect the new information “was warm” to the appropriate discourse concept “picnic supplies” Need a bridging inference to connect “the warm beer” to “picnic supplies”

Developing coherence Haviland and Clark (1974) Typical results
Task: Press a button when you understand the sentence. Conclusion: If you don’t know the old information and need to make an inference, this may slow down comprehension. Typical results Direct Matching We got some beer out of the trunk. The beer was warm. Comprehended faster Takes more time Bridging Inference We checked the picnic supplies. The beer was warm. World knowledge

Developing coherence Singer, Halldorson, Lear, & Andrusiak (1992)
Task: Press a button when you understand the sentence, if given a question, answer Yes or No. Conclusions: Suggests that the bridging inference was made More time consuming to make coherence of temporal than causal relations Results Causal condition Requires bridging inference “Murray poured water on the fire.” “The fire went out.” Faster reading time T/F “water extinguishes fire” Faster “T” Temporal condition No required inference “Murray drank a glass of water.” “The fire went out.” T/F “Does water extinguish fire?”

Brief summary Local Structure (microstructure):
Discourse is coherent if its elements are easily related. Coherence is achieved with cohesive ties between sentences. Comprehension is impeded when There are no antecedents, forcing a bridging inference The antecedent was not recent, forcing a reinstatement of the antecedent.

Local Structure (microstructure): The relationship between individual sentences Coherence Cohesion Global Structure (macrostructure): The relationship between the sentences and our knowledge of the world

Global Structure (macrostructure): The relationship between the sentences and our knowledge of the world Jill bought a new sweater. Sweaters are sometimes made of wool. Wool production gives some farmers a good livelihood. Farming is a high-risk business. On the news last night, I saw a group of business executives discussing recent trends in the stock market. Okay local structure, but each sentence isn’t relevant to an overall topic of discourse

Read story to class (from Bartlett, 1932) Read the War of the ghost story to class Bartlett (1932)

Global Structure (macrostructure): Schemas (Scripts) General knowledge structures for common social situations Genres Narrative structure Story grammars - extension of idea of grammatical rules, specify the organization of a story Expository structure Different structures

Effects of world knowledge
If the balloons pooped, the sound would not be able to carry since everything would be too far away from the correct floor. A closed window would also prevent the sound from carrying since most buildings tend to be well insulated. Since the whole operation depends on a steady flow of electricity, a break in the middle of the wire would also cause problems. Of course the fellow could shout, but the human voice is not loud enough to carry that far. An additional problem is that a string could break on the instrument. Then there could be no accompaniment to the message. It is clear that the best situation would involve less distance. Then there would be fewer potential problems. With face to face contact, the least number of things could go wrong. Bransford & Johnson (1972)

Rocky slowly got up from the mat, planning his escape. He hesitated a moment and thought. Things were not going well. What bothered him most was being held, especially since the charges against him had been weak. He considered his present situation. The lock that held him was strong but he thought he could break it. He knew, however, that his timing would have to be perfect. Prison escape OR Wrestling match Anderson et al (1977)

Schemas (Scripts) Mental structures of how the world works, acquired through experience A whole package of information about what we know about the world and events Generic story of situations A framework with causal information Used to facilitate comprehension of discourse, as well as to guide recall (and reconstruction)

Schemas (Scripts) Generic story of situations Restaurant Script Go inside Go to table Sit down Scene 1: Enter Scene 2: Order Get menu Read menu Choose food Give order Scene 3: Eat Get food Eat food Scene 4: Pay Ask for check Received check Tip waiter Pay check Exit

Bartlett (1932) Task: Read native American folk tale Write down everything that you can remember from that story that I read earlier Bartlett had them recall after a longer periods of time (between 15 mins. Up to 10 years later)

Bartlett (1932) Results: Participants’ memories changed to fit their existing beliefs (reconstructive memories) Added new details Changed details Deleted details Conclusions: We use our Schema to facilitate comprehension of discourse, as well as to guide recall (and reconstruction)

Invernizzi & Abouzeid (1995) Read two European tales (cry wolf & stone soup) 2 audiences European North American children Ponam children (New Guinea) Invernizzi & Abouzeid (1995) similar study, gave to individuals from different cultures, the memory distortions reflected their own cultures (e.g.., misremembered names were either more European or New Guinean depending on the culture of the recaller)

Invernizzi & Abouzeid (1995) Retelling of boy who cried wolf Ponam children (New Guinea) Once upon a time Kalai and his family they lived on an island. Kalai’s mother always carried him everywhere. One day Kalai’s mother and father went out fishing. Kalai’s mother said, “Kalai, you are too small to go out fishing in the sea. You should stay home with your grandfather.” Kalai was lonely on the beach. Kalai said, “How could I get my family home?” He sat down and decided to get his family home. He got his red laplap and ran down to the beach and waved his laplap to his family and said, “Fire, fire.” His brother saw his laplap and went home. When they arrived they saw nothing. Invernizzi & Abouzeid (1995) similar study, gave to individuals from different cultures, the memory distortions reflected their own cultures (e.g.., misremembered names were either more European or New Guinean depending on the culture of the recaller)

Invernizzi & Abouzeid (1995) Retelling of boy who cried wolf European North American children Kalai was running up and down the beach yelling “Fire, fire.” Everybody came home. The next day the same thing happened. They came home. The next day came, but the house caught on fire. He ran up and down the beach, but nobody came. Kalai kept waving the flag. Nobody came. Suddenly they saw the flames and the smoke and they came, but it was too late. Everything had burnt down to the ground, and his brother told him if he kept telling lies that nobody will come when you call for help. Invernizzi & Abouzeid (1995) similar study, gave to individuals from different cultures, the memory distortions reflected their own cultures (e.g.., misremembered names were either more European or New Guinean depending on the culture of the recaller)

Invernizzi & Abouzeid (1995) Impact of different schemata European North American children Setting, precipitating events, goal reaching aspects, story resolutions Ponam children (New Guinea) Recalled factual detail about settings, events, and outcomes, but leaving out things like consequence, resolution, moral (generally seemed to miss the point) Invernizzi & Abouzeid (1995) similar study, gave to individuals from different cultures, the memory distortions reflected their own cultures (e.g.., misremembered names were either more European or New Guinean depending on the culture of the recaller) Conclusions: We use our cultural schemas to facilitate comprehension of discourse, as well as to guide recall

When do we use the schema? During comprehension or recall? Smith and Swinney (1992) Task: presented stories (like the “balloons” one) Collected sentence by sentence reading times Had them recall the sentences Some people were given a title for the story, others not Invernizzi & Abouzeid (1995) similar study, gave to individuals from different cultures, the memory distortions reflected their own cultures (e.g.., misremembered names were either more European or New Guinean depending on the culture of the recaller) Results: Overall, reading times were faster with a title that without Stories with titles: More words were recalled and more “intrusions” (details consistent with the schema but not in the story) Conclusions: Schemas are used in both on-line comprehension and recall

Summary We use schemas to Facilitate the comprehension of discourse To guide recall (and reconstruction)

Effects of Genre Not all kinds of discourse follow the same structure
Different effects, purposes, etc. Expository discourse Convey info about a subject (e.g., textbook, lecture) Narrative discourse Tell a story: Introduce characters & settings, establish a goal, etc. APA style Newspaper articles

Expository Structure Reading texts, listening to lectures, etc.
Organized with different relationships (but can still draw a tree structure) Relationships Collection - ideas or events related on the basis of some commonality Causation - ideas are joined causally so that one idea is identified as the antecedent and another as the consequence Response - ideas are joined in a problem/solution or question/answer relationship Comparison - ideas are related by pointing out similarities and differences Description - general ideas are explained by giving attributes or other specific details

Narrative structure Once there was a woman. She saw a tiger’s
cave. She wanted a tiger’s whisker. She put food in front of the cave. The tiger came out. She pulled out a whisker. The story has a structure, a story grammar

Narrative structure Story grammar - can depict with a tree structure
Setting Episode Once there was a woman. Event Reaction Goal Overt Response She saw a tiger’s cave. Action Consequence She wanted a tiger’s whisker. Event She put food in front of the cave. The tiger came out. She pulled out a whisker.

Narrative structure Thorndyke (1977) Read more slowly but are better
Level effect Read more slowly but are better remembered. High hierarchy statements Lower in the hierarchy. Comprehensibility and recall were tied to inherent plot structure, independent of passage content She wanted a tiger’s whisker. The tiger came out.

Trabasso & Suh (1993) Test to see if structure effects whether inferences are made Task: Think aloud task Read through the story aloud (one sentence at a time) and talk aloud about their understanding of that sentence

Trabasso & Suh (1993) Sequential version Hierarchical version
Once there was a girl named Betty. One day, Betty found that her mother’s birthday was coming soon. Betty really wanted to give her mother a present. Betty went to the department store. How does this sentence connect up with the rest of the story? Betty found a pretty purse. Betty bought the purse. Her mother was very happy. Betty found that everything was too expensive. Betty could not buy anything. Betty felt sorry. Several days later, Betty saw her friend knitting. Betty was good at knitting. Betty decided to knit a sweater. Betty selected a pattern from a magazine. Betty followed the instructions in the article. Finally, Betty finished a beautiful sweater. Betty pressed the sweater. Betty folded the sweater carefully. Betty put it in the closet for the next time she was going out. Berry was very happy. Betty gave the sweater to her mother. Her mother was excited when she saw the present.

Trabasso & Suh (1993) Hierarchical version S = Setting E = Event
Once there was a girl named Betty. One day, Betty found that her mother’s birthday was coming soon. Betty really wanted to give her mother a present. Betty went to the department store. Betty found that everything was too expensive. Betty could not buy anything. Betty felt sorry. Several days later, Betty saw her friend knitting. S Betty was good at knitting. Betty decided to knit a sweater. Betty selected a pattern from a magazine. Betty followed the instructions in the article. Finally, Betty finished a beautiful sweater. Betty pressed the sweater. Betty folded the sweater carefully. Betty gave the sweater to her mother. Her mother was excited when she saw the present. E G A G A A O O A O A R O E R S = Setting E = Event R = Reaction G = Goal O = Overt Response A = Action

Trabasso & Suh (1993) Hierarchical version
Once there was a girl named Betty. One day, Betty found that her mother’s birthday was coming soon. Betty really wanted to give her mother a present. Betty went to the department store. Betty found that everything was too expensive. Betty could not buy anything. Betty felt sorry. Several days later, Betty saw her friend knitting. S Betty was good at knitting. Betty decided to knit a sweater. Betty selected a pattern from a magazine. Betty followed the instructions in the article. Finally, Betty finished a beautiful sweater. Betty pressed the sweater. Betty folded the sweater carefully. Betty gave the sweater to her mother. Her mother was excited when she saw the present. E G A G A A O O A O A R O E R Is a superordinate goal that motivates the subgoal of the next episode S E G A O O R A A O R E S G A A O

Trabasso & Suh (1993) Sequential version
Once there was a girl named Betty. One day, Betty found that her mother’s birthday was coming soon. Betty really wanted to give her mother a present. Betty went to the department store. Betty found a pretty purse. Betty bought the purse. Her mother was very happy. Several days later, Betty saw her friend knitting. S Betty was good at knitting. Betty decided to knit a sweater. Betty selected a pattern from a magazine. Betty followed the instructions in the article. Finally, Betty finished a beautiful sweater. Betty pressed the sweater. Betty folded the sweater carefully. Betty put it in the closet for the next time she was going out. Berry was very happy. E G A G A A O O A O A R O E R The goal is already filled, so not related to the subgoal of the next episode S E G A O O R E S G A A O A A O

Trabasso & Suh (1993) Results In a think aloud task
participants mentioned the superordinate goal in the hierarchical condition but not the sequential condition Story grammar structure matters Strongly support the hypothesis that readers do make global causal connections during reading.

Discourse in memory Daily Summary: Weekly summary:
Schemas are used to structure comprehension and memory Discourses have internal structures that impact comprehension and memory Weekly summary: Evidence supports the psychological reality of a number of different representations Propositions & propositional networks Embodied representations Inferences Schemata and scripts Situation models

Discourse in memory Kintsch’s model The Construction-Integration Model
Discourse occurs in a series of cycles As each sentence comes in it gets integrated into the discourse In each cycle Construction phase - activate relevant concepts Integration phase - keep only the most relevant elaborations Multiple levels of representation formed Surface form, textbase (propositional), situation model

Discourse in memory Did this sentence occur in the paragraph?
Kintsch and colleagues (1990) It was Friday night and Jack and Melissa were bored, so they decided to catch a movie. Jack scanned the newspaper. He saw that they could just make the nine o’clock showing of the hot new romantic comedy. Off they went. Did this sentence occur in the paragraph? Read before Jack scanned the newspaper. Jack looked through the newspaper. Jack looked through the movie ads. Jack looked over some editorials.

Discourse in memory Jack scanned the newspaper S N VP NP V
Kintsch’s model Jack scanned the newspaper. Jack scanned the newspaper S N VP NP V Surface form

Kintsch’s model Jack scanned the newspaper. Jack scanned the newspaper S N VP NP V Surface form Textbase Examine Jack Newspaper

Kintsch’s model Jack scanned the newspaper. Jack scanned the newspaper S N VP NP V Surface form Textbase Examine Jack Newspaper Situational Model

Discourse in memory Kintsch and colleagues (1990)
It was Friday night and Jack and Melissa were bored, so they decided to catch a movie. Jack scanned the newspaper. He saw that they could just make the nine o’clock showing of the hot new romantic comedy. Off they went. Did this sentence occur in the paragraph? Read before If Better memory here Jack scanned the newspaper. Jack looked through the newspaper. Jack looked through the movie ads. Jack looked over some editorials. Similar meaning Evidence for surface form

Discourse in memory Kintsch and colleagues (1990)
It was Friday night and Jack and Melissa were bored, so they decided to catch a movie. Jack scanned the newspaper. He saw that they could just make the nine o’clock showing of the hot new romantic comedy. Off they went. Did this sentence occur in the paragraph? Read before Jack scanned the newspaper. Jack looked through the newspaper. Jack looked through the movie ads. Jack looked over some editorials. If Better memory here Adds inference Infers which section did he scan. Evidence for Strong textbase

Discourse in memory Kintch and colleagues (1990)
It was Friday night and Jack and Melissa were bored, so they decided to catch a movie. Jack scanned the newspaper. He saw that they could just make the nine o’clock showing of the hot new romantic comedy. Off they went. Did this sentence occur in the paragraph? Jack scanned the newspaper. Jack looked through the newspaper. Jack looked through the movie ads. Jack looked over some editorials. If Better memory here consistent Consistent with situation model. inconsistent Evidence for Strong situation model

Discourse in memory Kintch and colleagues (1990)

Summary Discourse processing is both complex and flexible
Multiple representations Processing depends on context

PSY 369: Psycholinguistics

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "PSY 369: Psycholinguistics"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

PSY 369: Psycholinguistics

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "PSY 369: Psycholinguistics"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback