干扰材料的熟悉性和认知方式对语篇阅读的影响

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2015.02.09

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 采用熟悉词和不熟悉词为干扰材料,考察了干扰材料的熟悉性对语篇阅读的影响.实验第一阶段要求不同认知方式被试朗读插入熟悉度不同干扰材料的短文,考查被试的阅读效率;第二阶段采用学习—自由回忆任务考查不同提示条件下在短文中使用过的干扰词和新词的学习效果.结果发现:(1)对场独立者而言,熟悉词的干扰作用明显大于不熟悉词,而对场依存者而言,熟悉词和不熟悉词的干扰作用无差异;(2)在提示条件下,被试对干扰词的回忆量大于对新词的回忆量.研究结果表明,在语篇阅读过程中,与场依存者相比,熟悉的干扰材料对场独立者的影响更大;熟悉词比不熟悉词产生更大干扰的原因可能是由于其激活了读者更多的经验,而非具有加工的优势.

关键词: 干扰, 熟悉度, 场依存, 场独立, 语篇阅读

Abstract: The present study explored how the familiarity of distractions and individual cognitive styles influenced text reading by using familiar and unfamiliar words. The study included two stages. In the first stage, participants with different cognitive styles read eight passages and then answered three questions. In the second stage, participants studied a list of 16 words for free recall, consisting of 8 previously familiar distracting words, 8 new familiar words, or consisting of 8 previously unfamiliar distracting words, 8 new unfamiliar words. Half of the participants were cued about the relevance of previous distractions and text reading before recalling the words in the memory test. The results are as follows: the influence of the familiar words was significantly higher than that of the unfamiliar words for field independent participants, while there were no significant differences for field dependent participants. Furthermore, the number of old words (previously distractions) recalled was significantly higher than that of new words in the cued memory task for both familiar and unfamiliar words. The results indicate that: (1) compared to field dependent individuals, field independent individuals are more easily influenced by familiar distractions in text reading; (2) familiar words could lead more significant interference than unfamiliar ones in reading, possibly due to the activation of individual experience rather than the processing priority of familiar words.

Key words: interference, familiarity, field dependence, field independence, text reading

中图分类号:

G442

车晓玮, 张倩, 李寿欣. 干扰材料的熟悉性和认知方式对语篇阅读的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(2): 198-203.

CHE Xiaowei, ZHANG Qian, LI Shouxin. The Influence of The Familiarity of Distractions and Cognitive Styles in Text Reading[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2015, 31(2): 198-203.

参考文献

Brédart, S., Delchambre, M., & Laureys, S. (2006). One's own face is hard to ignore.QuarterlyJournal of Experimental Psychology, 59(1), 46-52.
Burke, D. M., & Shafto, M. A. (2008). Language and aging. In F. I. M. Craik & T. A. Salthouse, The handbook of aging and cognition(3rd ed.). New York :Psychology Press.373-443.
Carlson, M. C., Hasher, L., Connelly, S. L., & Zacks, R. T. (1995). Aging, Distraction, and the Benefits of Predictable Location.Psychology and Aging, 10(3), 427-436.
Connelly, S. L., Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. T. (1991). Age and reading: The impact of distraction.Psychology and Aging, 6(4), 533-541.
Devue, C., & Brédart, S. (2008). Attention to self-referential stimuli: Can I ignore my own face? Acta Psychologica, 128(2), 290-297.
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1995). The mechanisms of suppression and enhancement in comprehension.Psychologie Canadienne, 36(1), 49-50.
Kemper, S., & McDowd, J. (2006). Eye movements of Young and Older Adults while Reading with Distraction.Psychology and Aging, 21(1), 32-39.
McGinnis, & Debra. (2012). Susceptibility to Distraction during Reading in Young, Young-Old, and Old-Old Adults.Experimental Aging Research, 38(4), 370-393.
Mund, I., Bell, R., & Buchner, A. (2012). Aging and Interference in Story Recall.Experimental Aging Research, 38(1), 20-41.
Taylor, J. K., & Burke, D. M. (2002). Asymmetric aging effects on semantic and phonological processes: naming in the picture-word interference task. Psychology and Aging, 17(4), 662-676.
Thomas, R. C., & Hasher, L. (2012). Reflections of Distraction in Memory: Transfer of Previous Distraction Improves Recall in Younger and Older Adults.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(1), 30-39.
Williams, R. S., & Morris, R. K. (2004). Eye movements, word familiarity, and vocabulary acquisition.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16(1/2), 312-339.
Witkin, H. A., Goodenough, D. R., & Oltman, P. K. (1979). Psychological differentiation: Current status.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1127-1145.
Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Oltman, P. K., Goodenough, D. R., Friedman, F., Owen, D. R., et al. (1977).Role of the field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles in academic evolution: A longitudinal study.Journal of Educational Psychology, 69(3), 197-211.
Wyatt, N., & Machado, L. (2013). Distractor Inhibition: Principles of Operation during Selective Attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(1), 245-256.
白学军, 沈德立. (1996). 不同年级学生读课文时眼睛注视方式的研究.心理科学, 19(1), 6—10, 63.
陈向阳, 沈德立. (2004). 中小学生阅读寓言过程的眼动研究.心理科学, 27(4), 777—780.
费广洪, 王细英, 龚桂红. (2013). 图文相关性对不同认知方式大学生阅读影响的眼动研究.心理学报, 45(7), 783—789.
贾广珍, 李寿欣. (2013a). 不同认知方式个体抑制句法歧义的加工.心理学探新, 33(2), 163—167.
贾广珍, 李寿欣. (2013b). 不同认知方式个体抑制歧义词不适当意义的机制.心理科学, 36(2), 340-343.
李寿欣, 徐增杰, 陈慧媛. (2010). 不同认知方式个体在语篇阅读中抑制外部干扰的眼动研究.心理学报, 42(5), 539-546.
刘礼明. (2011).图—词干扰范式下的词频(或词的熟悉度)效应. 福建师范大学硕士学位论文.
孟庆茂, 常建华. (1988). 关于《镶嵌图形测验》评分方法及部分常模的修订. 见: 谢斯骏, 张厚粲.认知方式——一个人格维度的实验研究. 北京: 北京师范大学出版社, 278-280.
史玲玲. (2011).不同认知方式个体在句子理解中抑制干扰信息的实验研究. 西南大学硕士学位论文.
徐文俊. (2013).材料熟悉性对个体学习时间分配的影响——基于专家和新手的对比. 浙江师范大学硕士学位论文.
杨丽霞, 陈永明, 崔耀, 周治金. (2002). 理解能力不同的个体抑制干扰信息的效率.心理学报, 34(2), 120—125.
张建鹏, 陈慧媛, 张德香, 李寿欣. (2012). 语境类型对不同认知方式个体代词歧义消解的影响.应用心理学.18(4), 315-322.
周红, 范琳. (2011). 语篇阅读认知研究回顾.中国海洋大学学报( 社会科学版), 4, 52-58.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

[1]	温凯玲, 陈萍, 杨双, 宁宁. 前摄干扰对汉语听写困难儿童字形工作记忆的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(2): 153-160.
[2]	潘毅, 张琳. 工作记忆内容驱动完全无关刺激捕获注意[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(5): 522-529.
[3]	昂晨, 吕欢, 周亚聪, 李博闻, 王瑞明. 词汇熟悉度对非熟练中英双语者语言理解转换中非目标语言激活的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2016, 32(1): 26-32.
[4]	邢强, 单永明. 文本表述和结构对小学生数学应用题表征的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2013, 29(3): 292-298.
[5]	常松, 王瑞明, 李利, 谢久书. 非熟练双语者言语产生中非目标语言的激活范围[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2013, 29(1): 54-60.
[6]	罗良, 林崇德, 陈桄. 注意次级任务对客体与空间工作记忆信息保持的选择性干扰[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2010, 26(6): 561-568,576.
[7]	李翔宇, 郑希付. 病理性网络使用者对情绪信息的注意偏向研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2010, 26(4): 357-363.
[8]	孟红霞, 刘希平. 幼儿对假装游戏中意图和行为作用的理解[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2010, 26(2): 121-127.
[9]	王树芳, 莫雷, 金花. 任务难度和反馈学习对儿童类比推理能力的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2010, 26(1): 24-30.
[10]	吴明霞, 张大均, 陈旭, 余林, 郭成. 中小学教师工作-家庭冲突的测量[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2009, 25(1): 120-127.
[11]	郑希付. 初中生学习成绩与成就STROOP干扰[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2008, 24(1): 78-82.