{"title":"在中文阅读中,读者可能不会严格按照词语出现的顺序进行整合。","authors":"Hui Zhao, Linjieqiong Huang, Xingshan Li","doi":"10.3758/s13423-024-02614-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The current study investigated whether word integration follows a strictly sequential order during natural Chinese reading. Chinese readers' eye movements were recorded when they read sentences containing a three-character string (ABC), where BC was always a two-character word and AB was also a two-character word in the overlapping condition but not a word in the non-overlapping condition. We manipulated the extent to which word BC was plausible as an immediate continuation following prior context (cross-word plausibility); the string AB was always implausible given the prior context, and the sentence continued in a manner that was compatible with A-BC. The results showed that there were longer second-pass reading times on the string ABC region in the cross-word plausible condition than those in the cross-word implausible condition in both the overlapping condition and the non-overlapping condition. These results imply that readers do not always integrate words strictly in the order in which they appear in Chinese reading.</p>","PeriodicalId":20763,"journal":{"name":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Readers may not integrate words strictly in the order in which they appear in Chinese reading.\",\"authors\":\"Hui Zhao, Linjieqiong Huang, Xingshan Li\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13423-024-02614-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The current study investigated whether word integration follows a strictly sequential order during natural Chinese reading. Chinese readers' eye movements were recorded when they read sentences containing a three-character string (ABC), where BC was always a two-character word and AB was also a two-character word in the overlapping condition but not a word in the non-overlapping condition. We manipulated the extent to which word BC was plausible as an immediate continuation following prior context (cross-word plausibility); the string AB was always implausible given the prior context, and the sentence continued in a manner that was compatible with A-BC. The results showed that there were longer second-pass reading times on the string ABC region in the cross-word plausible condition than those in the cross-word implausible condition in both the overlapping condition and the non-overlapping condition. These results imply that readers do not always integrate words strictly in the order in which they appear in Chinese reading.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20763,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-024-02614-0\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-024-02614-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究探讨了在中文自然阅读过程中,词的整合是否遵循严格的顺序。我们记录了中文读者在阅读包含三字符串(ABC)的句子时的眼动情况,其中 BC 总是两个字符的词,AB 在重叠条件下也是两个字符的词,但在非重叠条件下不是一个词。我们操纵了单词 BC 在多大程度上可以作为先前语境后的直接延续(交叉单词可信度);考虑到先前语境,字符串 AB 始终是不可信的,句子以与 A-BC 相符的方式继续。结果显示,在重叠条件和非重叠条件下,交叉词可信条件下的 ABC 字符串区域的二次阅读时间都比交叉词不可信条件下的时间长。这些结果表明,在中文阅读中,读者并不总是严格按照词语出现的顺序进行整合。
Readers may not integrate words strictly in the order in which they appear in Chinese reading.
The current study investigated whether word integration follows a strictly sequential order during natural Chinese reading. Chinese readers' eye movements were recorded when they read sentences containing a three-character string (ABC), where BC was always a two-character word and AB was also a two-character word in the overlapping condition but not a word in the non-overlapping condition. We manipulated the extent to which word BC was plausible as an immediate continuation following prior context (cross-word plausibility); the string AB was always implausible given the prior context, and the sentence continued in a manner that was compatible with A-BC. The results showed that there were longer second-pass reading times on the string ABC region in the cross-word plausible condition than those in the cross-word implausible condition in both the overlapping condition and the non-overlapping condition. These results imply that readers do not always integrate words strictly in the order in which they appear in Chinese reading.
期刊介绍:
The journal provides coverage spanning a broad spectrum of topics in all areas of experimental psychology. The journal is primarily dedicated to the publication of theory and review articles and brief reports of outstanding experimental work. Areas of coverage include cognitive psychology broadly construed, including but not limited to action, perception, & attention, language, learning & memory, reasoning & decision making, and social cognition. We welcome submissions that approach these issues from a variety of perspectives such as behavioral measurements, comparative psychology, development, evolutionary psychology, genetics, neuroscience, and quantitative/computational modeling. We particularly encourage integrative research that crosses traditional content and methodological boundaries.