Conscious rereading is confirmatory: Evidence from bidirectional self-paced reading

Dario Paape, S. Vasishth
{"title":"Conscious rereading is confirmatory: Evidence from bidirectional self-paced\n reading","authors":"Dario Paape, S. Vasishth","doi":"10.5070/g6011182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Rereading during sentence processing can be confirmatory, in which case it serves to\n increase readers' certainty in their current interpretation, or it can be\n revisionary, in which case it serves to correct a misinterpretation (Christianson,\n Luke, Hussey, & Wochna, 2017). The distinction is particularly relevant in\n garden-path sentences, which have been argued to trigger revisionary rereading\n (Frazier & Rayner, 1982). In two web-based experiments that compare\n garden-path sentences with other linguistic constructions, we investigate deliberate\n rereading in the recently-proposed bidirectional self-paced reading (BSPR) paradigm\n (Paape & Vasishth, 2022). Our results show evidence for selective rereading\n only in very difficult garden-path sentences. Additionally, our results suggest that\n conscious, selective rereading is confirmatory: Readers find garden-path sentences\n less rather than more acceptable after selective rereading, suggesting that they\n reread either to confirm their initial analysis or to confirm the perceived\n ungrammaticality of the sentence. We discuss the role of conscious awareness in\n dealing with different types of linguistic inconsistency.","PeriodicalId":164622,"journal":{"name":"Glossa Psycholinguistics","volume":"33 8","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Glossa Psycholinguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5070/g6011182","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Rereading during sentence processing can be confirmatory, in which case it serves to increase readers' certainty in their current interpretation, or it can be revisionary, in which case it serves to correct a misinterpretation (Christianson, Luke, Hussey, & Wochna, 2017). The distinction is particularly relevant in garden-path sentences, which have been argued to trigger revisionary rereading (Frazier & Rayner, 1982). In two web-based experiments that compare garden-path sentences with other linguistic constructions, we investigate deliberate rereading in the recently-proposed bidirectional self-paced reading (BSPR) paradigm (Paape & Vasishth, 2022). Our results show evidence for selective rereading only in very difficult garden-path sentences. Additionally, our results suggest that conscious, selective rereading is confirmatory: Readers find garden-path sentences less rather than more acceptable after selective rereading, suggesting that they reread either to confirm their initial analysis or to confirm the perceived ungrammaticality of the sentence. We discuss the role of conscious awareness in dealing with different types of linguistic inconsistency.
有意识的重读是确认性的:来自双向自定节奏阅读的证据
在句子处理过程中,重读可以是验证性的,在这种情况下,它可以增加读者对当前解释的确定性,或者它可以是修正性的,在这种情况下,它可以纠正误解(Christianson, Luke, Hussey, & wochina, 2017)。这种区别在“花园小径”句子中尤为重要,有人认为这种句子会引发修正式重读(Frazier & Rayner, 1982)。在两个基于网络的实验中,我们比较了花园小径句子与其他语言结构,研究了最近提出的双向自定节奏阅读(BSPR)范式中的故意重读(Paape & Vasishth, 2022)。我们的研究结果表明,只有在非常困难的花园小径句子中才有选择性地重读。此外,我们的研究结果表明,有意识的、选择性的重读是确认性的:读者在选择性重读后发现花园小径句子更不容易接受,而不是更容易接受,这表明他们重读要么是为了确认他们最初的分析,要么是为了确认他们感知到的句子不符合语法。我们讨论了意识意识在处理不同类型的语言不一致中的作用。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信