Discourse updating after reading a counterfactual event

  1. Manuel de Vega 1
  2. Mabel Urrutia 1
  1. 1 University of La Laguna, Facultad de Psicología, Spain
Aldizkaria:
Psicológica: Revista de metodología y psicología experimental

ISSN: 1576-8597

Argitalpen urtea: 2012

Alea: 33

Zenbakia: 2

Orrialdeak: 157-173

Mota: Artikulua

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openSarbide irekia editor

Beste argitalpen batzuk: Psicológica: Revista de metodología y psicología experimental

Laburpena

This paper explores the temporal course of discourse updating after reading counterfactual events. To test the accessibility to discourse information, readers were asked to identify probes related to initial events in the text, previous to the counterfactual, or probes related to the critical counterfactual events. Experiment 1 showed that 500 ms after reading events in counterfactual format, initial events were more accessible than after reading the same critical events in factual format. This suggests that discourse updating occurs in factuals, but not in counterfactuals. However, the critical events were equally accessible in both formats, indicating that the alternative “as if” scenario was also activated in counterfactuals. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the initial events continued accessible 1500 ms after reading counterfactuals, but the alternative “as if” scenario becomes less accessible. In sum, the experiments indicate that the realistic meaning of counterfactuals prevents discourse updating at both the early and the late stage, whereas the “as if” meaning was only activated at the initial stage.

Erreferentzia bibliografikoak

  • Byrne, R.M.J. (2002). Mental models and counterfactual thoughts about what might have been. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6,(10), 426-431.
  • Byrne, R.M.J. (2005). The rational imagination. How people create alternatives to reality. Cambridge, M. A.: MIT Press.
  • Byrne, R.M.J., & Girotto, V. (2009). Cognitive processes in counterfactual thinking. In D.M., Keith, W.M., Klein, & J.A. Suhr (Eds.), Handbook of imagination and mental simulation (pp.151-160). New York: Psychology press.
  • Carpenter, P. (1973). Extracting information from counterfactual clauses. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behaviour, 12, 512-521.
  • De Vega, M. & Urrutia, M. (in press). Counterfactual sentences activate embodied meaning. An action-sentence compatibility effect study. Journal of Cognitive Psychology
  • De Vega, M., Urrutia, M., & Riffo, B. (2007). Cancelling updating in the comprehension of counterfactuals embedded in narratives. Memory & Cognition, 35(6), 1410-1421.
  • Fauconnier, G. (1994). Mental spaces. Aspects of meaning construction in natural language. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Ferguson , H.J., & Sanford , A.J. (2008). Anomalies in real and counterfactual worlds: An eye-movement investigation. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 609-626.
  • Ferguson, H.J. Sanford, A.J. & Leuthold, H. (2008). Eye-movements and ERPs reveal the time course of processing negation and remitting counterfactual worlds. Brain Research, 1236, 113-125.
  • García, J. (2009). Condición e hipótesis. Más allá de lo real y lo irreal. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas, 4, 79-88.
  • Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L.Morgan (Eds). Syntax and Semantics, vol. III, Speech Acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic.
  • Guttentag R., & Ferrell, J. (2004). Reality compared with its alternatives: age differences in judments of regret and relief. Developmental Psychology,40(5), 764-775.
  • Harris, P.L., German, T.P. & Mills, M. (1996). Children's use of counterfactual thinking in causal reasoning. Cognition, 61, 223-259.
  • Johnson-Laird, P.N. & Byrne, R.M.J. (2002) Conditionals: a theory of meaning, pragmatics, and inference. Psychological Review. 109, 646-678.
  • Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1982). The simulation heuristic, In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic & A. Tversky (Eds.) Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 201-208). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Kahneman, D. & Miller, D. (1986). Norm Theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review,93(2), 136-153.
  • Kaup, B. (2001). Negation and its impact on the accessibility of text information. Memory & Cognition, 29, 960-967.
  • Kaup, B. & Zwaan, R.A. (2003). Effects of negation and situational presence on the accessibility of text information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29 (3), 439–446.
  • Kaup, B., Lüdtke, J., & Zwaan, R. A. (2006). Processing negated sentences with contradictory predicates: Is a door that is not open mentally closed? Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 1033-1050.
  • Kaup, B. (2006). What psycholinguistic negation research tells us about the nature of the working memory representations utilized in language comprehension. In H. Pishwa (Ed.), Language and Memory (pp. 313-355). Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Langacker, R.W. (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Volume II, Descriptive Application. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
  • Levinson, S.C. (1995). Pragmatics. Great Britain: Cambridge University Press.
  • Nieuwland, M.S. & Kuperberg, G.R. (2008). When the truth is not too hard to handle. An event-related potential study on the pragmatics of negation. Psychological Science, 19(12), 1213-1218.
  • Roese, N & Olson, J. (1995). What might have been. The social psychology of counterfactual thinking. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  • Roese, N & Olson, J. (1997). Counterfactual thinking: The intersection of affect and function. In, M. P. Zanna. (Ed.). Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 29,(pp.1-59). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  • Roese, N. (2005). If only: How to turn regret into opportunity. New York: Broadway Books.
  • Santamaría, C., Espino, O., & Byrne, R. (2005). Counterfactual and semifactual conditionals prime alternative possibilities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 31, 1149 – 1154.
  • Spellman, B. A., Kincannon, A., & Stose, S. (2005). The relation between counterfactual and causal reasoning. In D. R. Mandel, D. J. Hilton, & P. Catellani (Eds.), The Psychology of Counterfactual Thinking (pp. 28-43). London: Routledge Research.
  • Stewart, A. J., Haigh, M., & Kidd, E. (2009). An investigation into the online processing of counterfactual and indicative conditionals. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 2113-2125.
  • Thompson, V. & Byrne, R. (2002). Reasoning Counterfactuallly: Making inferences about things that didn’t happen. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28 (6), 1154-1170.
  • Walsh, C.R. & Byrne, R.M.J. (2005). The mental representation of what might have been. In D. R. Mandel, D. J. Hilton, & P. Catellani (Eds.) The psychology of counterfactual thinking. In P. Robinson (Series Ed.), Routledge Research International Series in Social Psychology. London : Routledge.
Datuen iturria: Dialnet