Constructing and Validating Motive Bridging Inferences

Abstract

Understanding Jane left early for the birthday party, She spent an hour shopping at the mall requires detecting that the first statement motivates the second. The validation model states that before accepting this bridging inference, the reader validates it with reference to relevant knowledge. In particular, a mediating idea is first derived from the text outcome and its candidate motive. If the mediating idea is supported by general knowledge, then the inference has been validated. In tests of this anaylsis, experimental subjects read motive or control sequences and then answered questions probing the knowledge hypothesized to validate the motive inferences, such as Do birthday parties involve presents? Five experiments confirmed that understanding motive sequences facilitates validating knowledge. A control procedure also refuted a priming counterexplanation of these effects (Experiment 1). Validation processing obtained for motive-outcome statements separated by two to four sentences in coherent sequences (Experiments 2 to 4). Inferred and explicit validating knowledge had a similar representational status (Experiment 3). Whereas proofreading abolished the validation effect, a reading strategy promoting causal processing did not enhance it (Experiment 4). A delayed priming procedure indicated that validating knowledge is integrated with the text representation (Experiment 5). The implications of these findings for the constructionist and minimal inference analyses were explored. The validation effects were simulated using construction-integration model.