Disambiguating the ambiguity disadvantage effect: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence for semantic competition.

Greg Maciejewski, Ekaterini Klepousniotou
{"title":"Disambiguating the ambiguity disadvantage effect: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence for semantic competition.","authors":"Greg Maciejewski,&nbsp;Ekaterini Klepousniotou","doi":"10.1037/xlm0000842","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Semantic ambiguity has been shown to slow comprehension, although it is unclear whether this ambiguity disadvantage is attributable to competition in semantic activation or difficulties in response selection. We tested the two accounts by examining semantic relatedness decisions to homonyms, or words with multiple unrelated meanings (e.g., <i>football/electric fan</i>). Our behavioral results showed that the ambiguity disadvantage arises only when the different meanings of words are of comparable frequency, and are thus activated in parallel. Critically, this effect was observed regardless of response-selection difficulties, both when the different meanings triggered inconsistent responses on related trials (e.g., <i>fan-breeze)</i> and consistent responses on unrelated trials (e.g., <i>fan-snake</i>). Our electrophysiological results confirmed that this effect arises during semantic activation of the ambiguous word, indexed by the N400, not during response selection. Overall, the findings show that ambiguity resolution involves semantic competition and delineate why and when this competition arises. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":504300,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition","volume":" ","pages":"1682-1700"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000842","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/4/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Semantic ambiguity has been shown to slow comprehension, although it is unclear whether this ambiguity disadvantage is attributable to competition in semantic activation or difficulties in response selection. We tested the two accounts by examining semantic relatedness decisions to homonyms, or words with multiple unrelated meanings (e.g., football/electric fan). Our behavioral results showed that the ambiguity disadvantage arises only when the different meanings of words are of comparable frequency, and are thus activated in parallel. Critically, this effect was observed regardless of response-selection difficulties, both when the different meanings triggered inconsistent responses on related trials (e.g., fan-breeze) and consistent responses on unrelated trials (e.g., fan-snake). Our electrophysiological results confirmed that this effect arises during semantic activation of the ambiguous word, indexed by the N400, not during response selection. Overall, the findings show that ambiguity resolution involves semantic competition and delineate why and when this competition arises. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

消除歧义不利效应:语义竞争的行为和电生理证据。
语义歧义已被证明会减缓理解,尽管尚不清楚这种歧义劣势是由于语义激活的竞争还是反应选择的困难。我们通过检查同音异义词或具有多个不相关含义的词(例如,足球/电风扇)的语义相关性来测试这两种说法。我们的行为研究结果表明,歧义劣势只有在单词的不同含义频率相当时才会出现,从而并行激活。重要的是,无论反应选择困难如何,当不同的含义在相关试验(例如,fan-breeze)中引发不一致的反应时,以及在不相关试验(例如,fan-snake)中引发一致的反应时,都会观察到这种效应。我们的电生理结果证实,这种效应出现在由N400索引的歧义词的语义激活过程中,而不是在反应选择过程中。总的来说,研究结果表明歧义解决涉及语义竞争,并描述了这种竞争产生的原因和时间。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA,版权所有)。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信