dark forces in language comprehension
play

Dark Forces in Language Comprehension The Case of Neuroticism and - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dark Forces in Language Comprehension The Case of Neuroticism and Disgust in a Pupillometry Study Isabell Hubert & Juhani Jrvikivi isabell.hubert@ualberta.ca Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society Montral, QC July 2019


  1. Dark Forces in Language Comprehension The Case of Neuroticism and Disgust in a Pupillometry Study Isabell Hubert & Juhani Järvikivi isabell.hubert@ualberta.ca Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society Montréal, QC July 2019

  2. linguistics has not always considered “hot cognition” & individual differences e.g. Van Berkum et al. 2005

  3. individuals use world knowledge & real world context in language comprehension Kamide et al. 2003, Nieuwland et al. 2006, Sedivy et al. 1999, Tanenhaus et al. 1995, Traxler 2014

  4. social context, beliefs, & values personality? political views? disgust sensitivity? Boland & Queen 2016, Havas et al. 2007, Van Berkum et al. 2008, Van Berkum et al. 2009, Van den Brink et al. 2010

  5. Disgust Sensitivity protects from novel pathogens general cognition ➜ out-group stereotyping, political views differs between individuals language processing? Inbar et al. 2011, Smith et al. 2011

  6. The Pupillometry Paradigm cognitive effort mental workload attention arousal

  7. Materials Type of clash Example morpho-syntactic error She often ride her bike to work in the summer. semantic anomaly People often read heads for pleasure before bed. socio-cultural clash I always wear hair bands to hold in my bangs.

  8. Post-Tests Big Five personality inventory Disgust Scale - Revised

  9. Participants n 76 male/ 18 / 58 female age (yrs) 18 - 83 min - max age (yrs) 25.0 mean

  10. Data Pre-Processing downsampled to 125 Hz ○ blinks removed ○ numerical predictors normalized & centered ○ interest period: -500ms to 2000ms around clash

  11. Analysis: GAM Modelling in R no data lost in time-binning ➔ modelling non-linear relationships ➔ Interaction of interest Extra-linguistic variable x Time x Item rating Random structure Participant x Time random slope Item random intercept

  12. Morpho-Syntactic Errors She often ride her bike to work... Neuroticism x Time x Item rating

  13. Morpho-Syntactic Errors She often ride her bike to work... Neuroticism x Time x Item rating

  14. Neuroticism ➔ morpho-syntactic errors more ➜ larger ➔

  15. Socio-Cultural Clashes I always wear hair bands... Disgust sensitivity x Time x Item rating

  16. Socio-Cultural Clashes I always wear hair bands... Disgust sensitivity x Time x Item rating

  17. Disgust Sensitivity ➔ socio-cultural clashes higher ➜ larger ➔

  18. Results disgust sensitivity ➜ language comprehension ● extra-linguistic variables / listener-internal ● aspects do not affect comprehension across the board support one-step models of language ● comprehension Kamide et al. 2003, Sedivy et al. 1999, Tanenhaus et al. 1995, Traxler 2014

  19. Open Questions / Future Research other Big Five traits ○ different methodologies/paradigms ○ tie-in with: ➔ linguistic anticipation? ◆ bio-energetic account? ◆ Havas et al., 2007; Zadra & Clore, 2011; Van Berkum et al., 2013

  20. Thank You! Questions? slides design: based on “Cymbeline” by SlidesCarnival images: Unsplash Isabell Hubert & Juhani Järvikivi isabell.hubert@ualberta.ca Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society Montreal, QC July 2019

Recommend


More recommend