Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Anticipating a future versus integrating a recent event? Evidence from eye-tracking.
Acta Psychol (Amst) 2019; 200:102916AP

Abstract

When comprehending a spoken sentence that refers to a visually-presented event, comprehenders both integrate their current interpretation of language with the recent event and develop expectations about future event possibilities. Tense cues can disambiguate this linking, but temporary ambiguity in these cues may lead comprehenders to also rely on further, experience-based (e.g., frequency or an actor's gaze) cues. How comprehenders reconcile these different cues in real time is an open issue. Extant results suggest that comprehenders preferentially relate their unfolding interpretation to a recent event by inspecting its target object. We investigated to what extent this recent-event preference could be overridden by short-term experiential and situation-specific cues. In Experiments 1-2 participants saw substantially more future than recent events and listened to more sentences about future-events (75% in Experiment 1 and 88% in Experiment 2). Experiment 3 cued future target objects and event possibilities via an actor's gaze. The event frequency increase yielded a reduction in the recent event inspection preference early during sentence processing in Experiments 1-2 compared with Experiment 3 (where event frequency and utterance tense were balanced) but did not eliminate the overall recent-event preference. Actor gaze also modulated the recent-event preference, and jointly with future tense led to its reversal in Experiment 3. However, our results showed that people overall preferred to focus on recent (vs. future) events in their interpretation, suggesting that while two cues (actor gaze and short-term event frequency) can partially override the recent-event preference, the latter still plays a key role in shaping participants' interpretation.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Leibniz-Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft (ZAS), Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: abashidze@leibniz-zas.de.Department of Linguistics, University of Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany.Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Department of German Studies and Linguistics, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany; Berlin School of Mind and Brain, Einstein Center for Neurosciences Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: pia.knoeferle@hu-berlin.de.

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

31627034

Citation

Abashidze, Dato, et al. "Anticipating a Future Versus Integrating a Recent Event? Evidence From Eye-tracking." Acta Psychologica, vol. 200, 2019, p. 102916.
Abashidze D, Carminati MN, Knoeferle P. Anticipating a future versus integrating a recent event? Evidence from eye-tracking. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2019;200:102916.
Abashidze, D., Carminati, M. N., & Knoeferle, P. (2019). Anticipating a future versus integrating a recent event? Evidence from eye-tracking. Acta Psychologica, 200, p. 102916. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.102916.
Abashidze D, Carminati MN, Knoeferle P. Anticipating a Future Versus Integrating a Recent Event? Evidence From Eye-tracking. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2019 Oct 15;200:102916. PubMed PMID: 31627034.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Anticipating a future versus integrating a recent event? Evidence from eye-tracking. AU - Abashidze,Dato, AU - Carminati,Maria Nella, AU - Knoeferle,Pia, Y1 - 2019/10/15/ PY - 2018/05/20/received PY - 2019/08/06/revised PY - 2019/08/06/accepted PY - 2019/10/19/pubmed PY - 2019/10/19/medline PY - 2019/10/19/entrez KW - Actor gaze KW - Ambiguity KW - Eye tracking KW - Recent event preference KW - Sentence comprehension KW - Short-term experience KW - Tense SP - 102916 EP - 102916 JF - Acta psychologica JO - Acta Psychol (Amst) VL - 200 N2 - When comprehending a spoken sentence that refers to a visually-presented event, comprehenders both integrate their current interpretation of language with the recent event and develop expectations about future event possibilities. Tense cues can disambiguate this linking, but temporary ambiguity in these cues may lead comprehenders to also rely on further, experience-based (e.g., frequency or an actor's gaze) cues. How comprehenders reconcile these different cues in real time is an open issue. Extant results suggest that comprehenders preferentially relate their unfolding interpretation to a recent event by inspecting its target object. We investigated to what extent this recent-event preference could be overridden by short-term experiential and situation-specific cues. In Experiments 1-2 participants saw substantially more future than recent events and listened to more sentences about future-events (75% in Experiment 1 and 88% in Experiment 2). Experiment 3 cued future target objects and event possibilities via an actor's gaze. The event frequency increase yielded a reduction in the recent event inspection preference early during sentence processing in Experiments 1-2 compared with Experiment 3 (where event frequency and utterance tense were balanced) but did not eliminate the overall recent-event preference. Actor gaze also modulated the recent-event preference, and jointly with future tense led to its reversal in Experiment 3. However, our results showed that people overall preferred to focus on recent (vs. future) events in their interpretation, suggesting that while two cues (actor gaze and short-term event frequency) can partially override the recent-event preference, the latter still plays a key role in shaping participants' interpretation. SN - 1873-6297 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/31627034/Anticipating_a_future_versus_integrating_a_recent_event_Evidence_from_eye-tracking L2 - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0001-6918(18)30270-1 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -