Psycholinguistic studies have repeatedly demonstrated that downward entailing (DE) quantifiers are more difficult to process than upward entailing (UE) ones. We contribute to the current debate on cognitive processes causing the monotonicity effect by testing predictions about the underlying processes derived from two competing theoretical proposals: two-step and pragmatic processing models. We model reaction times and accuracy from two verification experiments (a sentencepicture and a purely linguistic verification task), using the diffusion decision model (DDM). In both experiments, verification of UE quantifier more than half was compared to verification of DE quantifier fewer than half. Our analyses revealed the same pattern of results across tasks: Both non-decision times and drift rates, two of the free model parameters of the DDM, were affected by the monotonicity manipulation. Thus, our modeling results support both two-step (prediction: nondecision time is affected) and pragmatic processing models (prediction: drift rate is affected).

Representational complexity and pragmatics cause the monotonicity effect / Schlotterbeck, Fabian; Ramotowska, Sonia; van Maanen, Leendert; Szymanik, Jakub. - (2020), pp. 3398-3404. (Intervento presentato al convegno CogSci tenutosi a virtual nel 2020).

Representational complexity and pragmatics cause the monotonicity effect

Szymanik, Jakub
2020-01-01

Abstract

Psycholinguistic studies have repeatedly demonstrated that downward entailing (DE) quantifiers are more difficult to process than upward entailing (UE) ones. We contribute to the current debate on cognitive processes causing the monotonicity effect by testing predictions about the underlying processes derived from two competing theoretical proposals: two-step and pragmatic processing models. We model reaction times and accuracy from two verification experiments (a sentencepicture and a purely linguistic verification task), using the diffusion decision model (DDM). In both experiments, verification of UE quantifier more than half was compared to verification of DE quantifier fewer than half. Our analyses revealed the same pattern of results across tasks: Both non-decision times and drift rates, two of the free model parameters of the DDM, were affected by the monotonicity manipulation. Thus, our modeling results support both two-step (prediction: nondecision time is affected) and pragmatic processing models (prediction: drift rate is affected).
2020
Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science
Massachusetts USA
Cognitive Science Society
Schlotterbeck, Fabian; Ramotowska, Sonia; van Maanen, Leendert; Szymanik, Jakub
Representational complexity and pragmatics cause the monotonicity effect / Schlotterbeck, Fabian; Ramotowska, Sonia; van Maanen, Leendert; Szymanik, Jakub. - (2020), pp. 3398-3404. (Intervento presentato al convegno CogSci tenutosi a virtual nel 2020).
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
0826.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (Publisher’s layout)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 694.92 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
694.92 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11572/369750
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact