on$ auditory$sentence$comprehension!

The!effects!of!relaHve!clause!complexity!on!auditory!sentence!comprehension.!The!effects!of!relaHve!clause!complexity!on!auditory.!

The$effects$of$rela.ve$clause$complexity!on$ auditory$sentence$comprehension! ! Jungna!Kim!([email protected])! ! Eve!Higby!([email protected])! Jungmee!Yoon!([email protected])! Toby!Mehl!([email protected])! Loraine!K.!Obler!([email protected])! Mira!Goral!([email protected])! $ !

Background!

The!effects!of!relaHve!clause!complexity!on!auditory!sentence!comprehension.!The!effects!of!relaHve!clause!complexity!on!auditory.!

Sentence!comprehension!involves!processing!of!a!variety!of! linguisHc!informaHon!and!uHlizing!a!high!level!of!cogniHve!abiliHes.!!

Sentence$Comprehension$

InformaHon!binding! Decoding!of!syntacHc!structures!! Complexity$of$syntac.c$structures$ SemanHc!interpretaHons! Holding!previously!presented!sentences!

Sentence!comprehension!involves!processing!of!a!variety!of! UpdaHng!and!processing!new!informaHon! linguisHc!informaHon!and!uHlizing!a!high!level!of!cogniHve!abiliHes.!!

English$Rela.ve$Clauses$ Subject!relaHve!clause!(SRCs)!

Object!relaHve!clause!(ORCs)!

The!employees!that$t$no.ced$the$fireman$hurried!across!the!open!field.!! The!employees!that$the$fireman$no.ced$t"hurried!across!the!open!field.!!

ORCs…" •  More!difficult!to!comprehend!(Staub,!2010;!Traxler!et!al.,!2002;!Yang!et!al.,! 2013)! •  Slower!processing!Hme!due!to!limited!resources!(Grodner!&!Gibson,! 2005)!

•  Slower!processing!Hme!due!to!low!experienHal!expectaHon!of!the! structure!(Levy,!2008)! •  Not!only!in!post_nominal!relaHve!clauses!(e.g.,!English)!but!also! pre_nominal!relaHve!clauses!(e.g.,!Korean)!(Kwon!et!al.,!2013)! !

Dependency$locality$theory$ •  Cost!required!to!integrate!new!discourse!referents! that!are!introduced!between!“the!endpoints!of!an! integraHon.”!(Grodner!&!Gibson,!2005)! SRC! The!employees!that!t!noHced!the!fireman!hurried!across!the!open!field.!!

Linguis.c$integra.on$cost$$ ORC! The!employees!that!the!fireman!noHced"t"hurried!across!the!open!field.!! (Gibson,!1998,!2000)! !

Theories$ Limited$resources$in$working$memory$ •  Ambiguity!in!ORCs!gives!readers!or!listeners!greater!processing! load!in!working!memory.! •  Memory!decay!in!process!of!linguisHc!integraHon!causes! processing!difficulty.! ! ! ! ! !Staub,!(2010)!

Theories$ Limited$resources$in$working$memory$ •  Ambiguity!in!ORCs!gives!readers!or!listeners!greater!processing! load!in!working!memory.! •  Memory!decay!in!process!of!linguisHc!integraHon!causes! processing!difficulty.!

!

!

The$employees$that$t$no.ced$the$fireman$hurried!across!the!open!field.!! The$employees$that$the$fireman$no.ced$t"hurried!across!the!open!field.!!

!(Friederici!et!al.,!1998;!Grodner!&!Gibson,!2005;!Just!&!Carpenter,!1992;!King!&!Just,! 1991;!MacDonald,!2008;!Staub,!2010;!Vos!et!al.,!2001a,!2001b;!Wanner!&!Maratsos,!1978)!

Theories$ Limited$resources$in$working$memory$

Grodner!&!Gibson!(2005)! !

•  Exp1.!There!was!significant!processing!delay!on!the!verb!within!an! ORC!as!compared!to!the!same!verb!in!an!SRC!(e.g.,!noHced).!!! ! •  Exp2.!AddiHonal!embedded!informaHon!(PP)!! –  e.g.,!The!administrator!who!the!nurse!from!the!clinic!supervised…! –  Processing!difficulty!with!integraHng!new!inputs!is!due!to!lexical! material!intervening!between!the!target!referents.!

Theories$ Limited$resources$in$working$memory$

Grodner!&!Gibson!(2005)! !

•  Exp1.!There!was!significant!processing!delay!on!the!verb!within!an! ORC!as!compared!to!the!same!verb!in!an!SRC!(e.g.,!noHced).!!! ! •  Exp2.!AddiHonal!embedded!informaHon!(PP)!! –  e.g.,!The!administrator!who!the!nurse!from!the!clinic!supervised…! –  Processing!difficulty!with!integraHng!new!inputs!is!due!to!lexical! material!intervening!between!the!target!referents.!

Interpre.ve$vs.$PostFinterpre.ve$processing$$

(SeparateFsentence$interpreta.on$resource$theory,$or$SSIR$theory)$

•  InterpreHve!processing! –  AutomaHc,!unconscious!! –  Implicit!interpretaHon!of!the!syntacHc!and!semanHc! informaHon! –  Mandatory!linguisHc!processing! •  Post_interpreHve!processing! –  Conscious!and!explicit! –  Reasoning,!semanHc!memory,!and!planning!acHons! Waters!&!Caplan!(2004)!







Accuracy$vs.$Response$Time$

Ra.onales$ •  Less!is!known!about!the!effect!of!relaHve!clause!sentence! structure!on!auditory!sentence!processing.!! ! •  Our!study!aimed!at!invesHgaHng!whether!syntacHc!complexity! affects!auditory!sentence!comprehension!using!two!types!of! relaHve!clauses!in!English!and!examining!whether!accuracy!and! RT!show!different!pakerns!during!sentence!processing.!!

The$Present$Study$ •  Research!quesHons:!

–  Do!ORCs!show!lower!accuracy!than!SRCs!for!auditory!input,!as! they!do!for!wriken!input?! –  Are!ORCs!processed!more!slowly!than!SRCs!for!auditory!input,! as!with!wriken!input?! –  Do!ACC!and!RT!data!show!the!same!processing!pakerns!for! SRCs!and!ORCs?!!

•  Hypotheses:!

–  ParHcipants!will!show!higher!accuracy!on!SRCs!compared!to! ORCs.! –  ParHcipants!will!respond!faster!for!SRCs!than!for!ORCs.! –  ParHcipants!will!exhibit!consistent!difficulty!with!processing!the! ORCs!in!both!accuracy!and!RT.!

_  _  _  _  _ 

Procedure$

Par.cipants$

115!Young!English_speaking!monolinguals! 18!–!35!years!old! Born!in!the!U.S.! Not!proficient!in!any!other!language! No!history!of!hearing!impairment,! neurological!disease!or!brain!injuries!

Methods$

1.  Sign!a!consent!form! 2.  Hearing!screening!test! (500Hz,!1kHZ,!2kHz,!4kHz! with!a!25!dB!tone)! 3.  Wide!Range!of! Achievement!Test!(WRAT)! –!word!reading!! 4.  The!language! comprehension!tests! _  Listen!to!each!sHmulus!! _  Make!a!judgment!about! plausibility!! _  Break! _  Be!accurate!and!rapid.!

Tests$&$S.muli$

_  Experimental!condiHons:!SRCs,!ORCs,!and!NRCs!! _  102!sentences!(64!experimental!sentences,!32!control!sentences,!6!discard!sentences)!

_  32$sentences$with$a$subject$rela.ve$clause$and$32$sentences$with$an$object$ rela.ve$clause,$32$non$rela.ve$clause$sentences$$ _  Half$plausible$and$half$implausible$

S.mulus$examples$ SRCs:$ The!bystander!spoked!the!officer!that!handcuffed!the!suspect.!(plausible)! The!lawyer!addressed!the!defendant!that!released!the!judge.!(implausible!)! ! ORCs:$ The!fans!yelled!at!the!baker!that!the!umpire!ejected.!(plausible)! The!maid!assisted!the!host!that!the!guest!invited.!(implausible!)! ! NRCs:$ The!painter!climbed!the!ladder!while!the!carpenter!instructed!the!apprenHce.! (plausible)! The!parent!rushed!to!the!school!when!the!teenager!suspended!the!principal. (implausible!)! !

Data$Filtering$

Data$ Analysis$

•  Excluded!data!from!5!parHcipants! •  Replaced!2.9%!of!the!total!data!with!the! value!at!2.5SD!above!the!individual!mean! RT!

Scoring$&$Reliability$

•  Dichotomous!scoring!for!accuracy!data! •  Internal!consistency!reliability!for!the! test! •  Paired!sample!t_test!for!accuracy!data! •  Repeated!measures!ANOVA!for!RT!data!

Results$(Accuracy)$

For!accuracy,!no!significant!differences!between!SRCs!and!ORCs.!

Results$(RT)$$

*!Post_hoc!(Tukey)!test!confirmed!the!mean!differences.!

For!RT,!ORCs!are!significantly!slower!than!SRCs.!

Summary$of$the$findings$ •  Findings!support!the!limited!resources!theory! –  No!greater!difficulty!for!ORCs!compared!with!SRCs! for!accuracy! –  Greater!processing!difficulty!for!ORCs!than!for!SRCs! for!RT! –  Different!results!in!terms!of!accuracy!and!RT! between!the!two!RC!types!during!auditory!sentence! comprehension!

!

Conclusion$&$Future$Direc.ons!$ •  Some!limitaHons!

–  No!measure!of!working!memory! –  No!measure!of!on_line!sentence!processing!

! However,!we!can!conclude!that! •  ORCs!appear!to!require!greater!processing!resources![omit!what! follows,!as!we!do!not!know!that!it's!working!memory!:!in! working!memory]!as!compared!to!SRCs.! •  It!is!possible!that!there!is!some!form!of!a!speed_accuracy! tradeoff!in!that!there!was!no!accuracy!difference!between!the! two!RC!condiHons!whereas!ORCs!were!processed!slower!than! SRCs.!

Thank$you…$$

Dr.!Loraine!Obler!

Acknowledgements! Jungmee! Yoon!

Eve!Higby!

Dr.!Mira!Goral!

Toby!Mehl!

Volunteers$

QuesHons?!