) 1东北师范大学心理学院, 长春 130024
2华南师范大学心理学院, 广州 510631
收稿日期:2018-06-22出版日期:2019-03-25发布日期:2019-01-22通讯作者:王穗苹E-mail:suiping@scnu.edu.cn基金资助:* 国家自然科学基金项目(31500878);国家自然科学基金项目(31571136);国家哲学社会科学重点研究项目资助(15AZD048)The effects of discourse context and world knowledge on pronoun resolution
WU Yan1, GAO Yuefei1, ZHAO Simin1, WANG Suiping2() 1 School of Psychology, Northeast Normal University, Changchun 130024, China
2 School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510631, China
Received:2018-06-22Online:2019-03-25Published:2019-01-22Contact:WANG Suiping E-mail:suiping@scnu.edu.cn摘要/Abstract
摘要： 本研究围绕中文代词理解中, 读者的常识性知识和语篇语境的作用以及作用时程这一问题展开。实验1首先探讨在中文阅读理解中, 职业性别倾向这种常识性信息是否能对代词的指认产生早期影响。存在一致和冲突(如警卫-他; 警卫-她)两个实验条件, 结果在凝视时间、重读时间和总阅读时间上都发现了职业性别倾向所引发的性别冲突效应。实验2在实验1基础上增加一个代词(如：警卫-他-他; 警卫-她-她), 考察更正后的信息, 即文本语境内容是否可以覆盖常识的作用对代词加工产生影响。结果发现语篇语境确实可以覆盖常识性信息的作用, 对代词加工产生早期影响。但是, 职业性别倾向这种常识性知识仍然在代词加工的后期阶段发挥作用。考虑到代词所形成的语境较为含蓄, 实验3中采用更明确的方式来界定职业名称的性别, 例如男艺人、爸爸等, 然后再出现一个代词, 代词的性别始终和先前的性别描述一致, 而与职业性别倾向冲突, 这样也存在一致和冲突两个条件(例如：保姆-妻子-她, 警卫-妻子-她), 结果发现只有更正后的语境信息对代词加工产生影响, 职业性别倾向不再发挥作用。说明在中文这种高语境依赖性的语言文字中, 语境可以覆盖常识性知识对代词加工产生早期作用。但是, 语境作用的持续性问题会受到语篇语境中性别信息明确程度的影响。
图/表 4
图1实验流程图
图1实验流程图表1代词区和代词后区各眼动指标的平均数和标准差 (ms)
| 眼动指标 | 代词区 | 代词后区 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | |
| 首次注视时间 | 225 (37) | 217 (22) | 228 (30) | 224 (26) |
| 凝视时间 | 296 (59) | 277 (63) | 262 (45) | 265 (56) |
| 重读时间 | 123 (104) | 99 (70) | 136 (99) | 121 (110) |
| 总阅读时间 | 381 (137) | 340 (104) | 365 (110) | 347 (108) |
表1代词区和代词后区各眼动指标的平均数和标准差 (ms)
| 眼动指标 | 代词区 | 代词后区 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | |
| 首次注视时间 | 225 (37) | 217 (22) | 228 (30) | 224 (26) |
| 凝视时间 | 296 (59) | 277 (63) | 262 (45) | 265 (56) |
| 重读时间 | 123 (104) | 99 (70) | 136 (99) | 121 (110) |
| 总阅读时间 | 381 (137) | 340 (104) | 365 (110) | 347 (108) |
表2T1区、T1+1区、T2区和T2+1区眼动指标的平均数和标准差(ms)
| 眼动指标 | T1区 | T1+1区 | T2区 | T2+1区 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | |
| 首次注视时间 | 219 (38) | 210 (32) | 228 (43) | 224 (34) | 206 (31) | 218 (32) | 210 (29) | 216 (32) |
| 凝视时间 | 321 (87) | 299 (65) | 289 (60) | 297 (81) | 286 (68) | 293 (76) | 260 (55) | 235 (42) |
| 重读时间 | 169 (99) | 143 (99) | 172 (120) | 157 (91) | 134 (86) | 114 (84) | 128 (110) | 113 (84) |
| 总阅读时间 | 455 (131) | 405 (125) | 440 (121) | 427 (95) | 377 (114) | 366 (119) | 359 (109) | 317 (87) |
表2T1区、T1+1区、T2区和T2+1区眼动指标的平均数和标准差(ms)
| 眼动指标 | T1区 | T1+1区 | T2区 | T2+1区 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | |
| 首次注视时间 | 219 (38) | 210 (32) | 228 (43) | 224 (34) | 206 (31) | 218 (32) | 210 (29) | 216 (32) |
| 凝视时间 | 321 (87) | 299 (65) | 289 (60) | 297 (81) | 286 (68) | 293 (76) | 260 (55) | 235 (42) |
| 重读时间 | 169 (99) | 143 (99) | 172 (120) | 157 (91) | 134 (86) | 114 (84) | 128 (110) | 113 (84) |
| 总阅读时间 | 455 (131) | 405 (125) | 440 (121) | 427 (95) | 377 (114) | 366 (119) | 359 (109) | 317 (87) |
表3T1区、T1+1区、T2区和T2+1区眼动指标的平均数和标准差(ms)
| 眼动指标 | T1区 | T1+1区 | T2区 | T2+1区 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | |
| 首次注视时间 | 211 (28) | 198 (33) | 187 (29) | 186 (35) | 212 (30) | 206 (19) | 191 (29) | 194 (23) |
| 凝视时间 | 288 (58) | 256 (53) | 262 (67) | 246 (59) | 253 (58) | 238 (69) | 216 (46) | 215 (37) |
| 重读时间 | 173 (94) | 133 (87) | 154 (121) | 129 (91) | 79 (50) | 77 (54) | 91 (78) | 73 (68) |
| 总阅读时间 | 430 (117) | 359 (105) | 384 (169) | 349 (183) | 297 (73) | 276 (84) | 289 (96) | 269 (89) |
表3T1区、T1+1区、T2区和T2+1区眼动指标的平均数和标准差(ms)
| 眼动指标 | T1区 | T1+1区 | T2区 | T2+1区 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | 冲突 | 一致 | |
| 首次注视时间 | 211 (28) | 198 (33) | 187 (29) | 186 (35) | 212 (30) | 206 (19) | 191 (29) | 194 (23) |
| 凝视时间 | 288 (58) | 256 (53) | 262 (67) | 246 (59) | 253 (58) | 238 (69) | 216 (46) | 215 (37) |
| 重读时间 | 173 (94) | 133 (87) | 154 (121) | 129 (91) | 79 (50) | 77 (54) | 91 (78) | 73 (68) |
| 总阅读时间 | 430 (117) | 359 (105) | 384 (169) | 349 (183) | 297 (73) | 276 (84) | 289 (96) | 269 (89) |
参考文献 29
| [1] | Anderson S. F., Kelley K., &Maxwell S. E . ( 2017). Sample-size planning for more accurate statistical power: A method adjusting sample effect sizes for publication bias and uncertainty. Psychological Science, 28( 11), 1547-1562. doi: 10.1177/0956797617723724URLpmid: 28902575 |
| [2] | Angele B., Slattery T. J., Yang J., Kliegl R., &Rayner K . ( 2008). Parafoveal processing in reading: Manipulating n+1 and n+2 previews simultaneously. Visual Cognition, 16( 6), 697-707. doi: 10.1080/13506280802009704URLpmid: 2677831 |
| [3] | Canal P., Garnham A., &Oakhill J . ( 2015). Beyond gender stereotypes in language comprehension: Self sex-role descriptions affect the brain's potentials associated with agreement processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 6( 9), 1953. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01953URLpmid: 4689154 |
| [4] | Chen H-C., Cheung H., Tang S. L., &Wong Y. T . ( 2000). Effects of antecedent order and semantic context on Chinese pronoun resolution. Memory & Cognition, 28( 3), 427-438. doi: 10.3758/BF03198558URLpmid: 10881560 |
| [5] | Cohen J . ( 1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 2nd(334). doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-179060-8.50012-8URL |
| [6] | Cook A.E., &Myers J.L . ( 2004). Processing discourse roles in scripted narratives: The influences of context and world knowledge. Journal of Memory and Language, 50( 3), 268-288. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2003.11.003URL |
| [7] | Crocker M. W., Pickering M., &Clifton C . ( 2000). Architectures and mechanisms for language processing. Linguistic Inquiry, 17( 4), 623-662. doi: 10.1162/coli.2000.26.4.648URL |
| [8] | Duffy S.A., & Keir, J. A . ( 2004). Violating stereotypes: Eye movements and comprehension processes when text conflicts with world knowledge. Memory & Cognition, 32( 4), 551-559. doi: 10.3758/BF03195846URLpmid: 15478749 |
| [9] | Ehrlich K., &Rayner K. ( 1983). Pronoun assignment and semantic integration during reading: Eye movements and immediacy of processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22( 1), 75-87. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(83)80007-3URL |
| [10] | Esaulova Y., Reali C., &von Stockhausen L . ( 2014). Influences of grammatical and stereotypical gender during reading: Eye movements in pronominal and noun phrase anaphor resolution. Language Cognition & Neuroscience, 29( 7), 781-803. doi: 10.1080/01690965.2013.794295URL |
| [11] | Garnham A. (Ed).( 2001) . Mental models and the interpretation of anaphora. Philadelphia: Psychology Press/ Taylor & Francis. |
| [12] | Garrod S., &Terras M. ( 2000). The contribution of lexical and situational knowledge to resolving discourse roles: Bonding and resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 42( 4), 526-544. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1999.2694URL |
| [13] | Hald L. A., Steenbeek-Planting E. G., &Hagoort P . ( 2007). The interaction of discourse context and world knowledge in online sentence comprehension. Evidence from the N400. Brain Research. 1146, 210-218. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2007.02.054URLpmid: 17433893 |
| [14] | Hess D. J., Foss D. J., &Carroll P . ( 1995). Effects of global and local context on lexical processing during language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 124( 1), 62-82. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.124.1.62URL |
| [15] | Inhoff A.W., &Liu W. ( 1998). The perceptual span and oculomotor activity during the reading of Chinese sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24( 1), 20-34. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.24.1.20URLpmid: 9483822 |
| [16] | Kennison S.M., &Trofe J.L . ( 2003). Comprehending pronouns: A role for word-specific gender stereotype information. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32( 3), 355-378. doi: 10.1023/A:1023599719948URLpmid: 12845944 |
| [17] | Kintsch W. ( 1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95( 2), 163-182. doi: 10.1037//0033-295X.95.2.163URLpmid: 3375398 |
| [18] | Kliegl R., Grabner E., Rolfs M., &Engbert R . ( 2004). Length, frequency, and predictability effects of words on eye movements in reading. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16( 1-2), 262-284. doi: 10.1080/09541440340000213URL |
| [19] | Love J., &McKoon G. ( 2011). Rules of engagement: Incomplete and complete pronoun resolution. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37( 4), 874-887. doi: 10.1037/a0022932URL |
| [20] | Nieuwland M.S., &Van Berkum J. J.A . ( 2006 a). Individual differences and contextual bias in pronoun resolution: Evidence from ERPs. Brain Research, 1118( 1), 155-167. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.08.022URLpmid: 16956594 |
| [21] | Nieuwland M.S., &Van Berkum J. J.A . ( 2006 b). When peanuts fall in love: N400 evidence for the power of discourse. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18( 7), 1098-1111. doi: 10.1080/00222340701582951URLpmid: 16839284 |
| [22] | Qiu L., Swaab T. Y., Chen H-C., &Wang S . ( 2012). The role of gender information in pronoun resolution: Evidence from Chinese. Plos One, 7( 5), e36156. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0036156URL |
| [23] | Qiu L. J., Wang S. P., &Chen H. C . ( 2012). Pronoun processing during language comprehension: The effects of distance and gender stereotype. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 44( 10), 1279-1288. |
| [ 邱丽景, 王穗苹, 陈烜之 . ( 2012). 阅读理解中的代词加工:先行词的距离与性别刻板印象的作用. 心理学报, 44( 10), 1279-1288.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2012.01279URL | |
| [24] | Rayner K. ( 1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124( 3), 372-422. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372URL |
| [25] | Rayner K. &Pollatsek A. ( 1989). The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall. |
| [26] | Taylor D.J., &Muller K.E . ( 1996). Bias in linear model power and sample size calculation due to estimating noncentrality. Communications in Statistics: Theory and Methods, 25( 7), 1595-1610. doi: 10.1080/03610929708831953URLpmid: 24363488 |
| [27] | Van Gompel R. P.G., &Majid A. ( 2004). Antecedent frequency effects during the processing of pronouns. Cognition, 90( 3), 255-264. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00161-6URLpmid: 14667697 |
| [28] | Wang S., Chen H-C., Yang J., &Mo L . ( 2008). Immediacy of integration in discourse comprehension: Evidence from Chinese readers’ eye movements. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23( 2), 241-257. doi: 10.1080/01690960701437061URL |
| [29] | Xu X., Jiang X., &Zhou X . ( 2013). Processing biological gender and number information during Chinese pronoun resolution: ERP evidence for functional differentiation. Brain and Cognition, 81( 2), 223-236. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2012.11.002URLpmid: 23262177 |
相关文章 15
| [1] | 杨群, 张积家, 范丛慧. 维吾尔族与汉族的大学生在汉语歧义词消解中的语境促进效应及反应抑制效应[J]. 心理学报, 2021, 53(7): 746-757. |
| [2] | 刘志方, 仝文, 张智君, 赵亚军. 语境预测性对阅读中字词加工过程的影响：眼动证据[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(9): 1031-1047. |
| [3] | 杨群, 王艳, 张积家. 正字法深度对汉族、维吾尔族大学生汉字词命名的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(1): 1-13. |
| [4] | 徐迩嘉, 隋雪. 身份信息与位置信息的加工进程及语境预测性的影响 *[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(6): 606-621. |
| [5] | 陈广耀, 何先友, 刘涛. 强弱语义语境下的否定句加工机制[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(2): 186-196. |
| [6] | 刘文理;周详;张明亮. 汉语塞−元−塞音序列语境效应机制探讨[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(9): 1057-1069. |
| [7] | 刘聪;焦鲁;孙逊;王瑞明. 语言转换对非熟练双语者不同认知控制成分的即时影响[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(5): 472-481. |
| [8] | 周爱保;李世峰;史战;刘沛汝;夏瑞雪;徐科朋;朱婧;任德云. 寻找自我：自我相关物主代词的编码与 theta节律的活动[J]. 心理学报, 2013, 45(7): 790-796. |
| [9] | 任桂琴,韩玉昌,于泽. 句子语境中汉语词汇形、音作用的眼动研究[J]. 心理学报, 2012, 44(4): 427-434. |
| [10] | 邱丽景;王穗苹;陈烜之. 阅读理解中的代词加工：先行词的距离与性别刻板印象的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2012, 44(10): 1279-1288. |
| [11] | 江新,房艳霞. 语境和构词法线索对外国学生汉语词义猜测的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2012, 44(1): 76-86. |
| [12] | 张积家,孙配贞. 汉语言语产生中先行关联词的隐含数倾向对代词选择的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2010, 42(09): 909-919. |
| [13] | 赵俊华,莫雷. 非熟练中-英双语者英语句子语义通达的语境效应[J]. 心理学报, 2010, 42(09): 920-928. |
| [14] | 钟年. 中文语境下的“心理”和“心理学”[J]. 心理学报, 2008, 40(06): 748-756. |
| [15] | 高兵,杨玉芳 . 整体语境和局部语境对代词理解的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2008, 40(04): 381-388. |
PDF全文下载地址:
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=4402
