2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2016.05.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Visually perceived spatial distance affects the interpretation of linguistically mediated social meaning during online language comprehension: An eye tracking reading study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
21
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
1
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Recent eye-tracking reading experiments on visually situated comprehension ( Guerra and Knoeferle, 2014 , 2017 ) have revealed an arguably more subtle interplay between representations of pictures and online sentence processing than previous studies on written (e.g., Gough, 1965 ; Knoeferle et al, 2011 ; comic books: Carroll et al, 1992 ; newspaper advertisements: Rayner et al, 2001 ) and spoken language comprehension (e.g., Altmann and Kamide, 1999 ; but see Cooper, 1974 ; Snedeker and Trueswell, 2003 ; Dahan and Tanenhaus, 2005 ; Huettig and Altmann, 2005 ; Weber et al, 2006 ; Duñabeitia et al, 2009 ). By ‘subtle’ we mean non-referential relations such as between spatial motion (of two playing cards) and semantic similarity (of sentential constituents, e.g., battle and war being similar).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Recent eye-tracking reading experiments on visually situated comprehension ( Guerra and Knoeferle, 2014 , 2017 ) have revealed an arguably more subtle interplay between representations of pictures and online sentence processing than previous studies on written (e.g., Gough, 1965 ; Knoeferle et al, 2011 ; comic books: Carroll et al, 1992 ; newspaper advertisements: Rayner et al, 2001 ) and spoken language comprehension (e.g., Altmann and Kamide, 1999 ; but see Cooper, 1974 ; Snedeker and Trueswell, 2003 ; Dahan and Tanenhaus, 2005 ; Huettig and Altmann, 2005 ; Weber et al, 2006 ; Duñabeitia et al, 2009 ). By ‘subtle’ we mean non-referential relations such as between spatial motion (of two playing cards) and semantic similarity (of sentential constituents, e.g., battle and war being similar).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Note that we are not claiming that these accounts, models or theories could not be adapted to include social context. We have selected one account (see Guerra and Knoeferle, 2014 , 2017 ; Knoeferle et al, 2014 on how the CIA can accommodate context effects in written language comprehension; see Knoeferle and Crocker, 2006 , 2007 for context effects in spoken language comprehension) to illustrate how enrichment with socially relevant information might be achieved.…”
Section: Extant Approaches To Social Effects In Language Processingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The outcome of this reconciliation is tracked (match vs. mismatch) via indices to ant and int, and a truth value tracks the veracity of manual responses. Regarding int i′ , reconciliation involves coindexing representations of (minimally) nouns/verbs with those of depicted objects/actions (see Guerra and Knoeferle, 2014 , 2017 on non-referential co-indexing). Additionally, revision of the sentence interpretation can be informed by the scene.…”
Section: The Social Coordinated Interplay Accountmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In line with this hypothesis, participants read coordinated abstract nouns faster when they were similar (vs. opposite) in meaning and had been preceded by a video conveying proximity (vs. distance; playing cards move closer together vs. farther apart). In a second set of studies 39 , sentences described the interaction between two people as intimate or unfriendly, leading to the discovery that videos of two cards approaching one another sped up the reading of sentence regions that conveyed social proximity/intimacy. Note that the spatial distance affected sentence reading rapidly and incrementally even when the sentences did not refer to the objects in the video.…”
Section: Representative Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%