PSY 357 - Exam #3 Questions With Complete Solutions
Understand the pieces of evidence (methods, results,
implications) in favor of the idea that language planning
proceeds in a "radically incremental" fashion.
- Griffin (2001)
Participants were given a picture description of 3 objects (we'll
use A, B, and C), "the A and B are above the C". Only
frequency of A affected speech latency, even if B was fixated
first, meaning people only planned their sentence up to A at
first.
Also know what the concept of "flexible incrementality" means
for models of language production (including how it differs
from "radical" incrementality).
- Flexible incrementality: sometimes in small increments,
sometimes in large ones.
- Radical incrementality: minimal level of planning/increment,
always that small.
Also know what the concept of "flexible incrementality" means
for models of language production (including how it differs
from "radical" incrementality), and how the following
experiments support that notion.
- Time pressure experiment
- More incremental, plan in small chunks when under pressure.
Also know what the concept of "flexible incrementality" means
for models of language production (including how it differs
,from "radical" incrementality), and how the following
experiments support that notion.
- Working memory experiment
- More working memory -> further planning in advance.
Regarding the Branigan et al. (2000) paper:
- Be able to answer any of the questions about the article that
were posted to Blackboard.
- Theory: are comprehension and production the same?
- Hypothesis: does comprehension prime production? What you
hear in a conversation should influence what you say in a
conversation.
- Steps:
1 - Confederate would read a description in one of two forms,
participant must find matching card-Confederate reads statement
participant picks matching cards that matches statement
2 - Participant must then describe picture that could take one of
two forms-participant picks response card and describes picture
to confederate who is listening.
- Independent variable: verb type and syntactic structure used by
confederate.
- Dependent variable: syntactic structure used by the participant.
Regarding the Branigan et al. (2000) paper:
- Understand how it supports the idea that speech is made
"easier" in the context of conversation.
- Shows that conversations motivates us to share and use the
same structures as the receiver so that both parties can share a
mutual understanding of what they're talking about.
, Regarding the Branigan et al. (2000) paper:
- Given an example of a sentence, be able to identify a reply that
would demonstrate syntactic priming.
- A sentence that is answered with similar syntax/grammatical
structure.
Regarding the Branigan et al. (2000) paper:
- Be able to identify the definition of syntactic priming.
- Prior use of specific grammatical construction increases
changes that a speaker will use that construction (independently
of sentence meaning).
- Implies that there is a separate level of syntactic planning -the
boy kicked the man -> the dog bit the cat- the man was kicked
by the boy -> the cat was bitten by the dog.
Understand the results and implications of the total sum of the
research on the relationship between language production and
language comprehension (i.e., evidence concerning the extent to
which we know whether they are served by the same or different
systems, and whether they would operate in the same or
opposite directions from sound to meaning).
- Different systems:
- People judge complex sentences as ungrammatical, yet they
commonly produce them.
- Production: starts with meaning -> sound.
- Comprehension: starts with sound -> meaning.
Understand the pieces of evidence (methods, results,
implications) in favor of the idea that language planning
proceeds in a "radically incremental" fashion.
- Griffin (2001)
Participants were given a picture description of 3 objects (we'll
use A, B, and C), "the A and B are above the C". Only
frequency of A affected speech latency, even if B was fixated
first, meaning people only planned their sentence up to A at
first.
Also know what the concept of "flexible incrementality" means
for models of language production (including how it differs
from "radical" incrementality).
- Flexible incrementality: sometimes in small increments,
sometimes in large ones.
- Radical incrementality: minimal level of planning/increment,
always that small.
Also know what the concept of "flexible incrementality" means
for models of language production (including how it differs
from "radical" incrementality), and how the following
experiments support that notion.
- Time pressure experiment
- More incremental, plan in small chunks when under pressure.
Also know what the concept of "flexible incrementality" means
for models of language production (including how it differs
,from "radical" incrementality), and how the following
experiments support that notion.
- Working memory experiment
- More working memory -> further planning in advance.
Regarding the Branigan et al. (2000) paper:
- Be able to answer any of the questions about the article that
were posted to Blackboard.
- Theory: are comprehension and production the same?
- Hypothesis: does comprehension prime production? What you
hear in a conversation should influence what you say in a
conversation.
- Steps:
1 - Confederate would read a description in one of two forms,
participant must find matching card-Confederate reads statement
participant picks matching cards that matches statement
2 - Participant must then describe picture that could take one of
two forms-participant picks response card and describes picture
to confederate who is listening.
- Independent variable: verb type and syntactic structure used by
confederate.
- Dependent variable: syntactic structure used by the participant.
Regarding the Branigan et al. (2000) paper:
- Understand how it supports the idea that speech is made
"easier" in the context of conversation.
- Shows that conversations motivates us to share and use the
same structures as the receiver so that both parties can share a
mutual understanding of what they're talking about.
, Regarding the Branigan et al. (2000) paper:
- Given an example of a sentence, be able to identify a reply that
would demonstrate syntactic priming.
- A sentence that is answered with similar syntax/grammatical
structure.
Regarding the Branigan et al. (2000) paper:
- Be able to identify the definition of syntactic priming.
- Prior use of specific grammatical construction increases
changes that a speaker will use that construction (independently
of sentence meaning).
- Implies that there is a separate level of syntactic planning -the
boy kicked the man -> the dog bit the cat- the man was kicked
by the boy -> the cat was bitten by the dog.
Understand the results and implications of the total sum of the
research on the relationship between language production and
language comprehension (i.e., evidence concerning the extent to
which we know whether they are served by the same or different
systems, and whether they would operate in the same or
opposite directions from sound to meaning).
- Different systems:
- People judge complex sentences as ungrammatical, yet they
commonly produce them.
- Production: starts with meaning -> sound.
- Comprehension: starts with sound -> meaning.
