Affiliation:
1. University of Memphis , Memphis, United States
Abstract
Abstract
In a forced-choice mouse-tracking paradigm, true and false statements (ranging from very true, to ambiguous, to very false) were tested in both affirmative and negated forms. Replicating prior research, mouse trajectories reveal subtle differences in a continuum of true to false statements. However, negation modifies this process, particularly for very true statements (i.e. Bread is not made from sand). The mouse trajectories were more curved with negated sentences, with end-points of the continuum of truth (very true and very false statements) having the greatest area under the curve. The proposed explanation is the pragmatic meaning of a negated statement such as “Gummie bears are not alive” is infelicitous, whereas a true statement “People live on Earth” is felicitous. This study reveals the online dynamics of processing these statements and possible confusion, particularly when very true statements contain a negation.
Reference32 articles.
1. Abrams, R. A., & Balota, D. A. (1991). Mental chronometry: Beyond reaction time. Psychological Science, 2, 153–157.
2. Anderson, S., Huette, S., Matlock, T., & Spivey, M. (2010). On the temporal dynamics of negated perceptual simulations. In F. Parrill, V. Tobin, & M. Turner (Eds.), Meaning, Form, & Body (pp. 1–20). Stanford, CSLI.
3. Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278.
4. Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999999-0.
5. Brysbaert, M., & Stevens, M. (2018). Power analysis and effect size in mixed effects models: A tutorial. Journal of Cognition, 1(1): 9, 1–20.