实时句子处理中的论点角色敏感性:来自混合理解和生成任务的证据

IF 2.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Eun-Kyoung Rosa Lee , Colin Phillips
{"title":"实时句子处理中的论点角色敏感性:来自混合理解和生成任务的证据","authors":"Eun-Kyoung Rosa Lee ,&nbsp;Colin Phillips","doi":"10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Previous studies suggest that comprehenders initially fail to use argument roles (i.e., who did what to whom) when generating expectations for upcoming words in sentence processing. In contrast, production studies show that people rarely produce role-inappropriate sentence continuations in a speeded cloze task, indicating rapid use of argument roles. This contrast in role-sensitivity is unexpected if both situations involve the same underlying processes and if the experimental measures equally reflect those processes. Here, we show that the apparent conflict arises from different task demands involved in comprehension and production experiments, and that when they are engaged in an identical next-word generation task, people show immediate use of argument roles in both comprehension and production. In two experiments, participants had to either produce a continuation of a sentence fragment or judge the plausibility of a complete sentence. The trial types were interleaved and presented randomly, which ensured that the sentence contexts were processed in the same way. In Experiment 1, we found rapid use of argument roles in the production trials, where participants produced target verbs more frequently and with faster onset times in role-appropriate than in role-reversed contexts, indicating that role-sensitivity in production was unaffected by the interleaved comprehension trials. In Experiment 2, the same hybrid design was used to measure role-sensitivity in the comprehension trials, while participants quickly produced sentence continuations in the interleaved production trials. A significantly smaller N400 was observed on target verbs presented in role-appropriate contexts than in role-reversed contexts, indicating immediate role-sensitivity in comprehension, as found in production. Together, the results indicate that argument roles have an immediate impact on processing, in both comprehension and production, when there is a need to quickly commit to a single next-word continuation. Our findings shed light on the connection between speaking and understanding, and more broadly, the relationship between perception and action in cognitive science.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48455,"journal":{"name":"Cognition","volume":"264 ","pages":"Article 106255"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Argument role sensitivity in real-time sentence processing: Evidence from a hybrid comprehension and production task\",\"authors\":\"Eun-Kyoung Rosa Lee ,&nbsp;Colin Phillips\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106255\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Previous studies suggest that comprehenders initially fail to use argument roles (i.e., who did what to whom) when generating expectations for upcoming words in sentence processing. In contrast, production studies show that people rarely produce role-inappropriate sentence continuations in a speeded cloze task, indicating rapid use of argument roles. This contrast in role-sensitivity is unexpected if both situations involve the same underlying processes and if the experimental measures equally reflect those processes. Here, we show that the apparent conflict arises from different task demands involved in comprehension and production experiments, and that when they are engaged in an identical next-word generation task, people show immediate use of argument roles in both comprehension and production. In two experiments, participants had to either produce a continuation of a sentence fragment or judge the plausibility of a complete sentence. The trial types were interleaved and presented randomly, which ensured that the sentence contexts were processed in the same way. In Experiment 1, we found rapid use of argument roles in the production trials, where participants produced target verbs more frequently and with faster onset times in role-appropriate than in role-reversed contexts, indicating that role-sensitivity in production was unaffected by the interleaved comprehension trials. In Experiment 2, the same hybrid design was used to measure role-sensitivity in the comprehension trials, while participants quickly produced sentence continuations in the interleaved production trials. A significantly smaller N400 was observed on target verbs presented in role-appropriate contexts than in role-reversed contexts, indicating immediate role-sensitivity in comprehension, as found in production. Together, the results indicate that argument roles have an immediate impact on processing, in both comprehension and production, when there is a need to quickly commit to a single next-word continuation. Our findings shed light on the connection between speaking and understanding, and more broadly, the relationship between perception and action in cognitive science.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognition\",\"volume\":\"264 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106255\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027725001957\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"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":"Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027725001957","RegionNum":1,"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

先前的研究表明,在对句子处理中即将到来的单词产生期望时,理解者最初没有使用论点角色(即谁对谁做了什么)。相反,生成性研究表明,人们在快速填空任务中很少产生角色不合适的句子续句,这表明他们快速地使用了论点角色。如果两种情况涉及相同的潜在过程,并且实验测量同样反映了这些过程,那么角色敏感性的这种对比是出乎意料的。在这里,我们证明了明显的冲突源于理解和生产实验中涉及的不同任务需求,并且当他们从事相同的下一代任务时,人们在理解和生产中都表现出立即使用论点角色。在两个实验中,参与者要么要写出一个句子片段的延续,要么要判断一个完整句子的合理性。试验类型是交错的,随机呈现的,保证了句子上下文的处理方式相同。在实验1中,我们发现在生产实验中,被试快速使用论点角色,在角色适当情境中,被试比在角色颠倒情境中更频繁地产生目标动词,并且开始时间更快,这表明生产中的角色敏感性不受交错理解实验的影响。在实验2中,同样的混合设计用于测试理解试验中的角色敏感性,而在交错生产试验中,参与者快速生产句子。在角色合适的语境中,目标动词的N400值明显小于在角色相反的语境中,这表明理解中的角色敏感性与生产中的一样。综上所述,研究结果表明,当需要快速执行下一个单词的延续时,论点角色对理解和生成的处理都有直接的影响。我们的发现揭示了说话和理解之间的联系,更广泛地说,是认知科学中感知和行动之间的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Argument role sensitivity in real-time sentence processing: Evidence from a hybrid comprehension and production task
Previous studies suggest that comprehenders initially fail to use argument roles (i.e., who did what to whom) when generating expectations for upcoming words in sentence processing. In contrast, production studies show that people rarely produce role-inappropriate sentence continuations in a speeded cloze task, indicating rapid use of argument roles. This contrast in role-sensitivity is unexpected if both situations involve the same underlying processes and if the experimental measures equally reflect those processes. Here, we show that the apparent conflict arises from different task demands involved in comprehension and production experiments, and that when they are engaged in an identical next-word generation task, people show immediate use of argument roles in both comprehension and production. In two experiments, participants had to either produce a continuation of a sentence fragment or judge the plausibility of a complete sentence. The trial types were interleaved and presented randomly, which ensured that the sentence contexts were processed in the same way. In Experiment 1, we found rapid use of argument roles in the production trials, where participants produced target verbs more frequently and with faster onset times in role-appropriate than in role-reversed contexts, indicating that role-sensitivity in production was unaffected by the interleaved comprehension trials. In Experiment 2, the same hybrid design was used to measure role-sensitivity in the comprehension trials, while participants quickly produced sentence continuations in the interleaved production trials. A significantly smaller N400 was observed on target verbs presented in role-appropriate contexts than in role-reversed contexts, indicating immediate role-sensitivity in comprehension, as found in production. Together, the results indicate that argument roles have an immediate impact on processing, in both comprehension and production, when there is a need to quickly commit to a single next-word continuation. Our findings shed light on the connection between speaking and understanding, and more broadly, the relationship between perception and action in cognitive science.
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
Cognition
Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
283
期刊介绍: Cognition is an international journal that publishes theoretical and experimental papers on the study of the mind. It covers a wide variety of subjects concerning all the different aspects of cognition, ranging from biological and experimental studies to formal analysis. Contributions from the fields of psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, computer science, mathematics, ethology and philosophy are welcome in this journal provided that they have some bearing on the functioning of the mind. In addition, the journal serves as a forum for discussion of social and political aspects of cognitive science.
×
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