高低阅读技能聋生词汇加工的语境预测性效应特点:眼动证据

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2018.06.07

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本研究考察中文聋生读者利用语境预测性信息促进词汇加工的过程特点。实验采用3（组别：高阅读技能聋生组vs.高阅读技能聋生的能力匹配健听组vs.低阅读技能聋生组）×2（句子背景对目标词的预测程度：高预测vs.低预测）混合设计。结果发现：（1）目标词的左侧词汇上，能力匹配健听组在凝视时间和总注视时间两个指标上可见语境预测性效应，两个聋生组在任何指标上均没有语境预测性效应；（2）目标词上，能力匹配健听组在首次注视时间、凝视时间和总注视时间三项指标上均可见显著的语境预测性效应，高阅读技能聋生组仅在总注视上可见语境预测性效应，低阅读技能聋生的任何眼动指标均没有语境预测性效应。由此可见，聋生在利用语境预测性促进词汇加工方面与健听读者有所差异；相对于低阅读技能聋生，高阅读技能聋生读者识别词汇时能更多地利用语境预测性信息。

关键词: 中文阅读, 聋生, 语境预测性效应, 眼动

Abstract: We explore how deaf students use context information for promoting word processing during Chinese reading. The experiment was a 3 (groups:skill deaf readers vs. skill hearing readers vs. less-skill deaf readers)×2 (the degree of prediction:high prediction vs. low prediction) mixed design. The results showed that:for the eye movement measures in pre-target region (1) there were significant or marginal significant effect of prediction in total fixation time and gaze duration for skill hearing readers, however, prediction effects for skill and less-skill deaf readers were not reliable; For the eye movement measures in target region (2) the effects of prediction in total fixation time, gaze duration and first fixation duration for skill hearing readers were all reliable, only the effect of prediction in total fixation time was significant for skill deaf readers, there was no prediction effects for less-skill deaf readers. Thus, these results indicated that it was qualitative differences between hearing and deaf reading when they use contextual cues to boost word processing, and that compared with the less-skill deaf readers, skill deaf readers can make better use of context information.

Key words: Chinese reading, deaf readers, prediction effects, eye movements

中图分类号:

G442

陈朝阳, 刘志方, 苏永强, 程亚华. 高低阅读技能聋生词汇加工的语境预测性效应特点:眼动证据[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2018, 34(6): 692-699.

CHEN Chaoyang, LIU Zhifang, SU Yongqiang, CHENG Yahua. The Prediction Effects for Skill and Less-skill Deaf Readers in Chinese Reading: Evidence from Eye Movement[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2018, 34(6): 692-699.

参考文献

Angele, B., Timothy J., Slattery, 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.
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390-412.
Bai, X. J., Liang, F. F., Blythe, H, I., Zang, C. L., Yan, G. L., & Liversedge, S. P. (2013). Interword spacing effects on the acquisition of new vocabulary for readers of Chinese as a second language. Journal of Research in Reading, 36(S1), S4-S17
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing:Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255-278.
Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2011). LME4:Linear mixedeffects models using S4 classes. R Package Version 0.999375-39. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4.
Bélanger, N. N., Baum, S. R., & Mayberry, R. I. (2012). Reading difficulties in adult deaf readers of French:Phonological codes, not guilty! Scientific Studies of Reading,16 (3), 263-285.
Bélanger, N. N., & Rayner, K. (2013). Frequency and predictability effects in eye fixations for skilled and less-skilled deaf readers. Visual Cognition, 21(4),477-497
Bélanger, N. N., & Rayner, K. (2015). What eye movements reveal about deaf readers. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(3), 220-226.
Bélanger, N. N., Lee, M., & Schotter, E. R. (2018). Young skilled deaf readers have an enhanced perceptual span in reading. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(1), 291-301.
Dambacher, M., Kliegl, R., Hofmann, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (2006). Frequency and predictability effects on event related potentials during reading. Brain Research, 1084(1), 89-103
Fischler, I. (1985). Word recognition, use of context, and reading skill among deaf college students. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(2), 203-218.
Lei, L., Pan, J., Liu, H., Mcbridechang, C., Li, H., Zhang, Y., et al. (2011). Developmental trajectories of reading development and impairment from ages 3 to 8 years in chinese children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52(2), 212-220.
Ma, G., Li, X., & Rayner, K. (2015). Readers extract character frequency information from nonfixated-target word at long pretarget fixations during Chinese reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 41(5),1409-1419.
Pan, J., Shu, H., Wang, Y., & Yan, M. (2015). Parafoveal activation of sign translation previews among deaf readers during the reading of Chinese sentences. Memory & Cognition, 43(6), 964-972.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing:20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372-422.
Rayner, K., Li, X., Juhasz, B. J., & Yan, G. (2005). The effect of word predictability on the eye movements of Chinese readers. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(6), 1089-1093
Rayner, K., Reichle, E. D., Stroud, M. J., Williams, C. C., & Pollatsek, A. (2006). The effect of word frequency, word predictability, and font difficulty on the eye movements of young and older readers. Psychology and Aging, 21(3), 448-465.
Reilly, R., & Radach, R. (2012). The dynamics of reading in non-Roman writing systems:A reading and writing special issue. Reading & Writing, 25(5), 935-950.
Yan, M., Pan, J., Bélanger, N. N., & Shu, H. (2015). Chinese deaf readers have early access to parafoveal semantics. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory and Cognition. 41(1), 254-261.
Yang, J., Wang, S., Xu, Y., & Rayner, K. (2009). Do Chinese readers obtain preview benefit from character n + 2? Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 35(4), 1192-1204.
白学军, 孟红霞, 王敬欣, 田静, 臧传丽, 闫国利. (2011). 阅读障碍儿童与其年龄和能力匹配儿童阅读空格文本的注视位置效应. 心理学报, 43(8), 851-862.
乔静芝, 张兰兰, 闫国利. (2011). 聋生与健听大学生汉语阅读知觉广度的比较研究. 应用心理学, 17(3), 249-258.
苏衡, 刘志方, 曹立人. (2016). 中文阅读预视加工中的词频和预测性效应及其对词切分的启示:基于眼动的证据. 心理学报, 48(6), 625-636.

相关文章 15

[1]	王敬欣, 赵赛男, 徐倩倩. 字间空格与词频对青年人和老年人阅读的影响:眼动研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(6): 781-787.
[2]	高子惠, 焦雨, 王曦, 刘肖岑. 电子绘本文字的动静态呈现方式对幼儿阅读体验和学习效果的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(6): 817-824.
[3]	张锋, 尹华站, 靳凯歌, 臧鑫磊, 朱芷毅, 赵俊峰. 聋生1秒以下与以上的视时距知觉研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(4): 457-465.
[4]	于晓, 张涵, 陈英和, 戚玥, 刘爱芳, 刘丽丽. 类比推理的眼动研究:揭示个体类比推理策略发展的有效手段[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(6): 897-903.
[5]	施芳婷, 郑晨烨, 颜秀琳, 陆露, 王静梅, 邸波, 卢英俊. 5~6岁幼儿对不同文化背景卡通面孔再认的眼动研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(3): 323-334.
[6]	马安然, 王燕青, 王福兴, 周治金. 教学微视频的播放速度对学习效果的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(3): 391-399.
[7]	辛聪, 张曼曼, 郭盈秀, 郭云飞, 陈幼贞. 前瞻记忆意向后效应的加工机制:来自眼动的证据[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(2): 138-145.
[8]	刘志方, 仝文, 张骏. 中文阅读中词汇加工的年老化:眼动证据[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(6): 665-677.
[9]	王薇, 徐知宇, 李永鑫, 程奕芸. 情绪主题绘本阅读对自闭症谱系障碍儿童情绪理解障碍的干预效果[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(5): 566-572.
[10]	张骏, 仝文, 刘志方. 不同词长中文句子阅读知觉广度的年老化:眼动证据[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(3): 312-319.
[11]	童钰, 王福兴. 威胁性刺激蛇一定会被更快觉察吗?蛇与蜥蜴的对比[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2017, 33(5): 524-534.
[12]	苏永强, 付福音, 刘志方, 陈朝阳. 阅读中词汇视觉编码年老化的原因:基于消失文本实验的证据[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2017, 33(4): 433-440.
[13]	李文静, 童钰, 王福兴, 康素杰, 刘华山, 杨超. 动画教学代理对多媒体学习的影响:学习者经验与偏好的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2016, 32(4): 453-462.
[14]	钱莹莹, 王福兴, 段朝辉, 周宗奎. 动画速度和学习者经验对多媒体学习的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2016, 32(2): 191-197.
[15]	张玉晶, 买合甫来提·坎吉, 阻木然提古丽·然木吐拉. 不同水平五年级维吾尔族学生母语阅读知觉广度[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(6): 703-709.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed