Half-listening or zoned out? It's about the same: the impact of attentional state on word processing in context.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
Cognitive Neuroscience Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-22 DOI:10.1080/17588928.2023.2224959
Megan A Boudewyn
{"title":"Half-listening or zoned out? It's about the same: the impact of attentional state on word processing in context.","authors":"Megan A Boudewyn","doi":"10.1080/17588928.2023.2224959","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Language comprehension must require some degree of attentional focus, but how do periods of inattention and/or split attention impact how language is processed? Here EEG was recorded while participants listened to full-length stories, and were periodically asked about whether they were fully attentive, were completely inattentive, or felt that they were in a split attention state. The ERP response to the words immediately preceding these attention questions was examined as a function of participant response, which allowed for the comparison of word processing in each of these attentional states. When participants were on-task, typical N400 effects of lexical frequency (smaller N400 for common compared to less common words), word position (smaller N400 for words appearing late in a sentence compared to words appearing with less preceding context), and surprisal (smaller N400 for relatively expected words compared to relatively unexpected words) were observed. When participants were in a fully inattentive state, the word-level effect of frequency was intact, but the context-dependent effects of word position and surprisal were significantly reduced. Interestingly, the pattern of results when participants were in a split attention state closely matched that of the fully inattentive state. Overall, the results demonstrate how attentional state influences sensitivity to language context during comprehension, and show that the consequences of inattention and split attention on word processing in context are quite similar, at least on the indices measured here.</p>","PeriodicalId":10413,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Neuroscience","volume":"14 3","pages":"107-114"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11276090/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17588928.2023.2224959","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Language comprehension must require some degree of attentional focus, but how do periods of inattention and/or split attention impact how language is processed? Here EEG was recorded while participants listened to full-length stories, and were periodically asked about whether they were fully attentive, were completely inattentive, or felt that they were in a split attention state. The ERP response to the words immediately preceding these attention questions was examined as a function of participant response, which allowed for the comparison of word processing in each of these attentional states. When participants were on-task, typical N400 effects of lexical frequency (smaller N400 for common compared to less common words), word position (smaller N400 for words appearing late in a sentence compared to words appearing with less preceding context), and surprisal (smaller N400 for relatively expected words compared to relatively unexpected words) were observed. When participants were in a fully inattentive state, the word-level effect of frequency was intact, but the context-dependent effects of word position and surprisal were significantly reduced. Interestingly, the pattern of results when participants were in a split attention state closely matched that of the fully inattentive state. Overall, the results demonstrate how attentional state influences sensitivity to language context during comprehension, and show that the consequences of inattention and split attention on word processing in context are quite similar, at least on the indices measured here.

半听还是全神贯注?差不多:注意状态对语境中文字处理的影响。
语言理解必然需要一定程度的注意力集中,但注意力不集中和/或注意力分散的时间段会对语言处理产生怎样的影响?在此,我们记录了参与者聆听完整故事时的脑电图,并定期询问他们是完全集中注意力、完全不集中注意力,还是感觉自己处于注意力分散状态。对紧接着这些注意力问题之前的单词的 ERP 反应作为参与者反应的函数进行了检查,这样就可以比较每种注意力状态下的单词处理情况。当参与者处于任务状态时,可以观察到典型的词频 N400 效应(常见词语的 N400 比不常见词语的 N400 小)、词语位置 N400 效应(在句子中出现较晚的词语的 N400 比出现在较少上下文中的词语的 N400 小)和意外 N400 效应(相对预期的词语的 N400 比相对意外的词语的 N400 小)。当受试者处于完全不集中注意力的状态时,词频的词级效应保持不变,但是词的位置和意外的上下文效应则明显减弱。有趣的是,当被试者处于分散注意状态时,其结果模式与完全不集中注意状态下的结果模式非常接近。总之,研究结果表明了注意力状态如何影响理解过程中对语言语境的敏感性,并表明注意力不集中和注意力分散对语境中的文字处理的影响非常相似,至少在这里测量的指标上是如此。
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
Cognitive Neuroscience
Cognitive Neuroscience NEUROSCIENCES-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cognitive Neuroscience publishes high quality discussion papers and empirical papers on any topic in the field of cognitive neuroscience including perception, attention, memory, language, action, social cognition, and executive function. The journal covers findings based on a variety of techniques such as fMRI, ERPs, MEG, TMS, and focal lesion studies. Contributions that employ or discuss multiple techniques to shed light on the spatial-temporal brain mechanisms underlying a cognitive process are encouraged.
×
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