Biomedical subjects

M A Gernsbacher

Publications and source records attributed to M A Gernsbacher.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed1991

The mechanism of suppression: a component of general comprehension skill.

We investigated whether the cognitive mechanism of suppression underlies differences in adult comprehension skill. Less skilled comprehenders reject less efficiently the inappropriate meanings of ambiguous words (e.g., the playing card vs. garden tool meaning of spade), the incorrect forms of homophones (e.g., patients vs. patience), the highly typical but absent members of scenes (e.g., a tractor in a farm scene), and words superimposed on pictures or pictures surrounding words. However, less skilled comprehenders are not less cognizant of what is contextually appropriate; in fact, they benefit from a biasing context just as much (and perhaps more) as more skilled comprehenders do. Thus, less skilled comprehenders do not have difficulty enhancing contextually appropriate information. Instead, we suggest that less skilled comprehenders suffer from a less efficient suppression mechanism, which we conclude is an important component of general comprehension skill.

Attention↗

PubMed1990

Investigating differences in general comprehension skill.

For adults, skill at comprehending written language correlates highly with skill at comprehending spoken language. Does this general comprehension skill extend beyond language-based modalities? And if it does, what cognitive processes and mechanisms differentiate individuals who are more versus less proficient in general comprehension skill? In our first experiment, we found that skill in comprehending written and auditory stories correlates highly with skill in comprehending nonverbal, picture stories. This finding supports the hypothesis that general comprehension skill extends beyond language. We also found support for the hypotheses that poorer access to recently comprehended information marks less proficient general comprehension skill (Experiment 2) because less skilled comprehenders develop too many mental substructures during comprehension (Experiment 3), perhaps because they inefficiently suppress irrelevant information (Experiment 4). Thus, the cognitive processes and mechanisms involved in capturing and representing the structure of comprehensible information provide one source of individual differences in general comprehension skill.

Attention↗

PubMed1989

Mechanisms that improve referential access.

Two mechanisms, suppression and enhancement, are proposed to improve referential access. Enhancement improves the accessibility of previously mentioned concepts by increasing or boosting their activation; suppression improves concepts' accessibility by decreasing or dampening the activation of other concepts. Presumably, these mechanisms are triggered by the informational content of anaphors. Six experiments investigated this proposal by manipulating whether an anaphoric reference was made with a very explicit, repeated name anaphor or a less explicit pronoun. Subjects read sentences that introduced two participants in their first clauses, for example, "Ann predicted that Pam would lose the track race," and the sentences referred to one of the two participants in their second clauses, "but Pam/she came in first very easily." While subjects read each sentence, the activation level of the two participants was measured by a probe verification task. The first two experiments demonstrated that explicit, repeated name anaphors immediately trigger the enhancement of their own antecedents and immediately trigger the suppression of other (nonantecedent) participants. The third experiment demonstrated that less explicit, pronoun anaphors also trigger the suppression of other nonantecedents, but they do so less quickly--even when, as in the fourth experiment, the semantic information to identify their antecedents occurs prior to the pronouns (e.g., "Ann predicted that Pam would lose the track race. But after winning the race, she..."). The fifth experiment demonstrated that more explicit pronouns--pronouns that match the gender of only one participant-trigger suppression more powerfully. A final experiment demonstrated that it is not only rementioned participants who improve their referential access by triggering the suppression of other participants; newly introduced participants do so too (e.g., "Ann predicted that Pam would lose the track race, but Kim..."). Thus, both suppression and enhancement improve referential access, and the contribution of these two mechanisms is a function of explicitness. The role of these two mechanisms in mediating other referential access phenomena is also discussed.

Cognition↗

PubMed1989

The cataphoric use of the indefinite this in spoken narratives.

Are concepts that were introduced with the unstressed, indefinite article this, as opposed to the indefinite a/an, more accessible from listeners' mental representations? Subjects heard and then verbally continued each of a series of informal narratives. The last clause of each narrative introduced a new noun phrase that began with either the indefinite this or the indefinite a/an (e.g., this egg or an egg). When the concepts were introduced with the indefinite this, the subjects referred to them more frequently, often within the first clauses that they produced, and typically via pronouns. In contrast, when the concepts were introduced with a/an, the subjects referred to them less frequently and typically via full noun phrases. Thus, concepts introduced with the indefinite this were more accessible; therefore, the indefinite this appears to operate cataphorically to improve referential access.

Adult↗

PubMed1987

Remembering left-right orientation of pictures.

In a study of recognition memory for pictures, we observed an asymmetry in classifying test items as "same" versus "different" in left-right orientation: Identical copies of previously viewed items were classified more accurately than left-right reversals of those items. Response bias could not explain this asymmetry, and, moreover, correct "same" and "different" classifications were independently manipulable: Whereas repetition of input pictures (one vs. two presentations) affected primarily correct "same" classifications, retention interval (3 hr vs. 1 week) affected primarily correct "different" classifications. In addition, repetition but not retention interval affected judgments that previously seen pictures (both identical and reversed) were "old". These and additional findings supported a dual-process hypothesis that links "same" classifications to high familiarity, and "different" classifications to conscious sampling of images of previously viewed pictures.

Adult↗