Contribution of working memory in parity and proportional judgments

Jakub Szymanik, M. Zajenkowski
{"title":"Contribution of working memory in parity and proportional judgments","authors":"Jakub Szymanik, M. Zajenkowski","doi":"10.1075/BJL.25.08SZY","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents experimental evidence on the differences in a sentence–picture verification task under additional memory load between parity and proportional quantifiers. We asked subjects to memorize strings of four or six digits, then to decide whether a quantified sentence was true for a given picture, and finally to recall the initially given string of numbers. The results show that: (a) proportional quantifiers are more difficult than parity quantifiers with respect to reaction time and accuracy; (b) maintaining either four or six elements in working memory has the same effect on the processing of parity quantifiers; (c) however, in the case of proportional quantifiers subjects perform better in the verification tasks under the six-digit load condition, and (d) even though the strings of four numbers were better recalled by subjects after judging parity there is no difference between quantifiers in the case of the six-element condition. We briefly outline two alternative explanations for the observed phenomena rooted in the computational model of quantifier verification and the different theories of working memory.","PeriodicalId":399126,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive and Empirical Pragmatics","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive and Empirical Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/BJL.25.08SZY","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

Abstract

This paper presents experimental evidence on the differences in a sentence–picture verification task under additional memory load between parity and proportional quantifiers. We asked subjects to memorize strings of four or six digits, then to decide whether a quantified sentence was true for a given picture, and finally to recall the initially given string of numbers. The results show that: (a) proportional quantifiers are more difficult than parity quantifiers with respect to reaction time and accuracy; (b) maintaining either four or six elements in working memory has the same effect on the processing of parity quantifiers; (c) however, in the case of proportional quantifiers subjects perform better in the verification tasks under the six-digit load condition, and (d) even though the strings of four numbers were better recalled by subjects after judging parity there is no difference between quantifiers in the case of the six-element condition. We briefly outline two alternative explanations for the observed phenomena rooted in the computational model of quantifier verification and the different theories of working memory.
工作记忆在等值和比例判断中的作用
本文给出了在附加内存负载下,奇偶量词和比例量词在句子-图片验证任务中的差异的实验证据。我们要求受试者记住四或六位数的字符串,然后判断一个量化的句子对给定的图片是否正确,最后回忆起最初给出的数字字符串。结果表明:(a)比例量词在反应时间和准确度方面比宇称量词困难;(b)在工作记忆中保留四个或六个元素对奇偶量词的处理有相同的影响;(c)而比例量词组在六位数负荷条件下的验证任务中表现较好;(d)尽管经过奇偶性判断后,四位数串的记忆较好,但在六元负荷条件下,量词组之间没有差异。我们简要概述了基于量词验证的计算模型和不同的工作记忆理论对观察到的现象的两种不同解释。
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