| |
Abstract:
Understanding a sentence such as, He blew out the match, is
harder after recently reading the sentence, He won the match, than
after recently reading the sentence, He lit the match. By employing
a "neutral" baseline (He saw the match) and a "no meaning" baseline
(He prosecuted the match) we can quantify the benefits of
previously reading a same meaning sentence and the costs of
previously reading a different meaning sentence. I attribute the
benefits to a mechanism of enhancement; I attribute the costs to a
mechanism of suppression. The costs incurred by suppressing an
irrelevant meaning are relatively quick-lived, whereas, the
benefits reaped by enhancing a relevant meaning last longer.
Less-skilled comprehenders, presumably because they are
characterized by less efficient suppression, incur little cost but
reap equivalent benefits. High frequency meanings, presumably
because they are already highly accessible, reap few additional
benefits. These costs and benefits are independent of response
speed, and the dissociations suggest against attributing these
costs and benefits to "episodic retrieval."
|
