IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Matilde E Simonetti, Iring Koch, Tanja C Roembke
{"title":"How do multiple meanings affect word learning and remapping?","authors":"Matilde E Simonetti, Iring Koch, Tanja C Roembke","doi":"10.3758/s13421-025-01706-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many words have multiple meanings. It is currently unclear how a word with more than one meaning is acquired or stored long-term. One possibility is that each word's meaning is less robustly encoded; this, in turn, may make it easier to acquire additional meanings. We investigated this hypothesis across three cross-situational statistical learning experiments (N<sub>1</sub> = 62 (in-lab), N<sub>2</sub> = 61 (online), N<sub>3</sub> = 60 (online)), using the same general procedure: During Learning Phase 1 (LP1), participants acquired both 1:1 (each word has one meaning) and 1:2 (each word has two meanings) mappings. In Learning Phase 2 (LP2), each word received one new meaning. Across experiments, we manipulated the frequency of 1:1 and 1:2 mappings. As expected, 1:2 mappings were always harder to acquire in LP1. However, in the LP2 of Experiment 1, former 1:1 mappings were remapped more easily than former 1:2 ones, while 1:2 mappings were remapped more easily in Experiments 2 and 3. These data suggest that words with multiple meanings are more easily remapped, indicating that each meaning is less robustly associated with the word, which in turn may facilitate the acquisition of an additional meaning. However, the observed inconsistencies in the remapping results between in-lab and online experiments suggest that CSWL may differ across these two settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":48398,"journal":{"name":"Memory & Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory & Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-025-01706-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

许多词都有多重含义。目前还不清楚具有多个含义的单词是如何获得或长期储存的。一种可能是,每个单词的含义被编码的稳健性较差;这反过来又可能使人们更容易获得额外的含义。我们在三个跨情境统计学习实验(N1 = 62(实验室内),N2 = 61(在线),N3 = 60(在线))中使用相同的一般程序研究了这一假设:在学习阶段 1(LP1),参与者获得了 1:1(每个词有一个含义)和 1:2(每个词有两个含义)两种映射。在学习阶段 2(LP2),每个单词获得一个新含义。在所有实验中,我们对 1:1 和 1:2 映射的频率进行了调整。不出所料,在 LP1 中,1:2 映射总是更难获得。然而,在实验 1 的 LP2 中,以前的 1:1 映射比以前的 1:2 映射更容易重新映射,而在实验 2 和 3 中,1:2 映射更容易重新映射。这些数据表明,多义词更容易被重新映射,这说明每个意义与该词的关联度较低,这反过来可能会促进额外意义的习得。然而,在实验室实验和在线实验中观察到的重映射结果不一致表明,CSWL 在这两种环境下可能有所不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How do multiple meanings affect word learning and remapping?

Many words have multiple meanings. It is currently unclear how a word with more than one meaning is acquired or stored long-term. One possibility is that each word's meaning is less robustly encoded; this, in turn, may make it easier to acquire additional meanings. We investigated this hypothesis across three cross-situational statistical learning experiments (N1 = 62 (in-lab), N2 = 61 (online), N3 = 60 (online)), using the same general procedure: During Learning Phase 1 (LP1), participants acquired both 1:1 (each word has one meaning) and 1:2 (each word has two meanings) mappings. In Learning Phase 2 (LP2), each word received one new meaning. Across experiments, we manipulated the frequency of 1:1 and 1:2 mappings. As expected, 1:2 mappings were always harder to acquire in LP1. However, in the LP2 of Experiment 1, former 1:1 mappings were remapped more easily than former 1:2 ones, while 1:2 mappings were remapped more easily in Experiments 2 and 3. These data suggest that words with multiple meanings are more easily remapped, indicating that each meaning is less robustly associated with the word, which in turn may facilitate the acquisition of an additional meaning. However, the observed inconsistencies in the remapping results between in-lab and online experiments suggest that CSWL may differ across these two settings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Memory & Cognition
Memory & Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
112
期刊介绍: Memory & Cognition covers human memory and learning, conceptual processes, psycholinguistics, problem solving, thinking, decision making, and skilled performance, including relevant work in the areas of computer simulation, information processing, mathematical psychology, developmental psychology, and experimental social psychology.
×
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