抓住言语计划和理解之间的注意力权衡。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES
Cecília Hustá, Antje Meyer
{"title":"抓住言语计划和理解之间的注意力权衡。","authors":"Cecília Hustá, Antje Meyer","doi":"10.1162/JOCN.a.97","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In conversation, future speakers often plan speech simultaneously with comprehension, which means that they must divide attentional resources between these processes. In this EEG study, we used responses to linguistic attention probes (i.e., syllable \"BA\" presented during spoken sentences) to track temporal variations in attention to comprehension. Participants were asked to listen to prerecorded sentences with expected or unexpected sentence-final words. Each sentence was presented twice, once with and once without the attention probe starting 100 msec after the target word onset. Participants saw a picture 50 msec before the target word. Depending on the test block (picture naming or button press), participants either named the picture or pressed the space bar, both after an 850-msec delay. The probes elicited a negative potential approximately 100 msec after probe onset (i.e., an attention probe effect) in all probe conditions. Unexpectedly, neither word expectancy nor speech planning influenced the timing or strength of the attention probe effect. This indicates that expectancy of words in Dutch does not affect the allocation of attention toward these words 100 msec after their onset (i.e., the time of the probe presentation). Interestingly, engaging in speech planning does not seem to divert attentional resources away from comprehension at the moment of probe presentation. These findings imply that listeners are able to effectively distribute their attentional resources between comprehension and speech planning and carry out these processes at the same time. Considering these unexpected findings, using attention probes might not be the best approach to capture variations in temporal attention in dual-task paradigms.</p>","PeriodicalId":51081,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Capturing the Attentional Trade-off between Speech Planning and Comprehension.\",\"authors\":\"Cecília Hustá, Antje Meyer\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/JOCN.a.97\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In conversation, future speakers often plan speech simultaneously with comprehension, which means that they must divide attentional resources between these processes. In this EEG study, we used responses to linguistic attention probes (i.e., syllable \\\"BA\\\" presented during spoken sentences) to track temporal variations in attention to comprehension. Participants were asked to listen to prerecorded sentences with expected or unexpected sentence-final words. Each sentence was presented twice, once with and once without the attention probe starting 100 msec after the target word onset. Participants saw a picture 50 msec before the target word. Depending on the test block (picture naming or button press), participants either named the picture or pressed the space bar, both after an 850-msec delay. The probes elicited a negative potential approximately 100 msec after probe onset (i.e., an attention probe effect) in all probe conditions. Unexpectedly, neither word expectancy nor speech planning influenced the timing or strength of the attention probe effect. This indicates that expectancy of words in Dutch does not affect the allocation of attention toward these words 100 msec after their onset (i.e., the time of the probe presentation). Interestingly, engaging in speech planning does not seem to divert attentional resources away from comprehension at the moment of probe presentation. These findings imply that listeners are able to effectively distribute their attentional resources between comprehension and speech planning and carry out these processes at the same time. Considering these unexpected findings, using attention probes might not be the best approach to capture variations in temporal attention in dual-task paradigms.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51081,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1162/JOCN.a.97\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/JOCN.a.97","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在对话中,未来的说话者经常在计划讲话的同时进行理解,这意味着他们必须在这两个过程之间分配注意力资源。在这项脑电图研究中,我们使用对语言注意探针的反应(即在口语句子中出现的音节“BA”)来追踪注意力对理解的时间变化。参与者被要求听预先录好的句子,其中包含预期或意外的句子结尾词。每个句子被呈现两次,一次是在目标单词出现后100毫秒开始的注意探针,一次是没有注意探针。参与者在看到目标单词前50毫秒看到一张图片。根据测试块(图片命名或按下按钮),参与者在850毫秒的延迟后,要么命名图片,要么按下空格键。在所有探针条件下,探针在探针开始后大约100毫秒引发负电位(即注意探针效应)。出乎意料的是,词语预期和言语计划都没有影响注意探测效应的时间和强度。这表明,对荷兰语单词的期望在单词出现100毫秒后(即探针呈现的时间)不会影响对这些单词的注意力分配。有趣的是,参与演讲计划似乎并没有在探索演示的时刻转移注意力资源。这些发现表明,听者能够有效地将注意力资源分配到理解和言语计划之间,并同时进行这两个过程。考虑到这些意想不到的发现,使用注意探针可能不是捕捉双任务范式中时间注意变化的最佳方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Capturing the Attentional Trade-off between Speech Planning and Comprehension.

In conversation, future speakers often plan speech simultaneously with comprehension, which means that they must divide attentional resources between these processes. In this EEG study, we used responses to linguistic attention probes (i.e., syllable "BA" presented during spoken sentences) to track temporal variations in attention to comprehension. Participants were asked to listen to prerecorded sentences with expected or unexpected sentence-final words. Each sentence was presented twice, once with and once without the attention probe starting 100 msec after the target word onset. Participants saw a picture 50 msec before the target word. Depending on the test block (picture naming or button press), participants either named the picture or pressed the space bar, both after an 850-msec delay. The probes elicited a negative potential approximately 100 msec after probe onset (i.e., an attention probe effect) in all probe conditions. Unexpectedly, neither word expectancy nor speech planning influenced the timing or strength of the attention probe effect. This indicates that expectancy of words in Dutch does not affect the allocation of attention toward these words 100 msec after their onset (i.e., the time of the probe presentation). Interestingly, engaging in speech planning does not seem to divert attentional resources away from comprehension at the moment of probe presentation. These findings imply that listeners are able to effectively distribute their attentional resources between comprehension and speech planning and carry out these processes at the same time. Considering these unexpected findings, using attention probes might not be the best approach to capture variations in temporal attention in dual-task paradigms.

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
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.10%
发文量
151
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience investigates brain–behavior interaction and promotes lively interchange among the mind sciences.
×
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