Processing of Written Irony: An Eye Movement Study

We examined processing of written irony by recording readers' eye movements while they read target phrases embedded either in ironic or non-ironic story context. After reading each story, participants responded to a text memory question and an inference question tapping into the understanding of the meaning of the target phrase. The results of Experiment 1 (N = 52) showed that readers were more likely to reread ironic than non-ironic target sentences during first-pass reading as well as during later look-backs. Experiment 2 (N = 60) examined individual differences related to working memory capacity (WMC), Sarcasm Self-Report Scale (SSS), and need for cognition (NFC) in the processing of irony. The results of Experiment 2 suggest that WMC, but not SSS or NFC, plays a role in how readers resolve the meaning of ironic utterances. High WMC was related to increased probability of initiating first-pass rereadings in ironic compared with literal sentences. The results of these two experiments suggest that the processing of (unconventional) irony does require extra processing effort and that the effects are localized in the ironic utterances.

[1]  C. F. Kao,et al.  The efficient assessment of need for cognition. , 1984, Journal of personality assessment.

[2]  Penny M. Pexman,et al.  Context Incongruity and Irony Processing , 2003 .

[3]  A. Katz,et al.  Saying What You Don't Mean , 2004 .

[4]  Ellen Winner,et al.  Obligatory processing of literal and nonliteral meanings in verbal irony , 1999 .

[5]  D. Chiappe,et al.  The role of working memory in the metaphor interference effect , 2010, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[6]  Ruth Filik,et al.  The on-line processing of written irony , 2010, Cognition.

[7]  Jukka Hyönä,et al.  Comprehending coherent and incoherent texts: evidence from eye movement patterns and recall performance , 1992 .

[8]  Dawn G. Blasko,et al.  Only the tip of the iceberg: Who understands what about metaphor? , 1999 .

[9]  R. Giora.  Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis , 1997 .

[10]  Jukka Hyönä,et al.  Do adult readers know how they read? Evidence from eye movement patterns and verbal reports. , 2006, British journal of psychology.

[11]  J Aharon-Peretz,et al.  The neuroanatomical basis of understanding sarcasm and its relationship to social cognition. , 2005, Neuropsychology.

[12]  Kavitha Srinivas,et al.  Obligatory Processing of the Literal Meaning of Ironic Utterances: Further Evidence , 2000 .

[13]  Ofer Fein,et al.  Irony: Graded salience and indirect negation. , 1998 .

[14]  R. Giora.  On irony and negation , 1995 .

[15]  Rachel Giora,et al.  On the priority of salient meanings: Studies of literal and figurative language , 1999 .

[16]  Siobhan Chapman.  Logic and Conversation , 2005 .

[17]  D. Chiappe,et al.  The role of working memory in metaphor production and comprehension. , 2007 .

[18]  P. Pexman.  It's Fascinating Research , 2008 .

[19]  Murray Singer,et al.  The role of working memory capacity and knowledge access in text inference processing , 1996, Memory & cognition.

[20]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[21]  Todd R. Ferretti,et al.  Discourse Factors That Influence Online Reading of Metaphor and Irony , 2000 .

[22]  P. Carpenter,et al.  Individual differences in working memory and reading , 1980 .

[23]  C. Klin,et al.  Perspective taking during reading: An on-line investigation of the illusory transparency of intention , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[24]  M. Daneman,et al.  Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis , 1996, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[25]  Heiner Deubel,et al.  The mind's eye : cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research , 2003 .

[26]  R. Baayen,et al.  Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items , 2008 .

[27]  Roger J. Kreuz,et al.  Regional Variation in the Use of Sarcasm , 2008 .

[28]  Herbert L. Colston,et al.  Irony in Language and Thought : A Cognitive Science Reader , 2007 .

[29]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition , 1998 .

[30]  Murray Singer,et al.  Validation in Reading Comprehension , 2013 .

[31]  Penny M. Pexman,et al.  How Sarcastic are You? , 2004 .

[32]  Dawn G. Blasko,et al.  ERP and behavioral evidence of individual differences in metaphor comprehension , 2003, Memory & cognition.

[33]  R. Gibbs.  On the psycholinguistics of sarcasm. , 1986 .

[34]  R. Gibbs.  Irony in Talk Among Friends , 2000 .

[35]  David Yun Dai,et al.  The role of need for cognition and reader beliefs in text comprehension and interest development , 2007 .