Testing the online reading effects of emotionality on relative clause attachment

Abstract Previous research has shown the impact of the emotional dimension of nouns (i.e., valence and arousal) on the completion of relative clauses (RC) that are preceded by a double antecedent [e.g.,: Someone shot the servant (the first noun phrase, NP1) of the actress (the second noun phrase, NP2) who was on the balcony] (Fraga et al. in Q J Exp Psychol 65:1740–1759, 2012). The present study explored for the first time the role of emotional valence, specifically emotional positive nouns, on RC disambiguation in a self-paced reading experiment. Two types of NP1–NP2 relationships were compared: emotional–neutral vs. neutral–emotional. Results showed NP1 preferences in the emotional–neutral condition, whereas no preferences were found in the neutral–emotional condition. We conclude that during reading, the emotional properties of nouns play a role in disambiguation preferences: RC attachment preferences can be neutralized when emotional factors are manipulated. The results are discussed within the framework of current models of sentence processing and with reference to the controversial differences between comprehension and production.

[1]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution , 1994 .

[2]  Christoph Scheepers,et al.  Syntactic Attachment and Anaphor Resolution: The Two Sides of Relative Clause Attachment , 1999 .

[3]  L. Frazier,et al.  Argument structure and association preferences in Spanish and English complex NPs , 1995, Cognition.

[4]  Jaime Redondo,et al.  The Spanish adaptation of ANEW (Affective Norms for English Words) , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[5]  M. Brysbaert,et al.  Modifier Attachment in Sentence Parsing: Evidence from Dutch , 1996 .

[6]  M. A. Pozo,et al.  Effects of negative content on the processing of gender information: An event-related potential study , 2014, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[7]  Christoph Scheepers,et al.  Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution In German , 1998 .

[8]  J Pynte,et al.  Competition Between Primary and Non-Primary Relations During Sentence Comprehension , 2001, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[9]  B. MacWhinney,et al.  Functionalism and the competition model , 1989 .

[10]  D Miroslav Ciric,et al.  Parsing in Different Languages , 2005 .

[11]  M. Bradley,et al.  Measuring emotion: Behavior, feeling, and physiology , 2000 .

[12]  Harald Clahsen,et al.  Children's Processing of Ambiguous Sentences: A Study of Relative Clause Attachment , 2003 .

[13]  M. Traxler.  Working memory contributions to relative clause attachment processing: A hierarchical linear modeling analysis , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[14]  Ana P. Piñeiro,et al.  Emotional Nouns Affect Attachment Decisions in Sentence Completion Tasks , 2012, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[15]  Manuel Carreiras,et al.  Parsing in different languages , 1996 .

[16]  Christoph Scheepers,et al.  Syntactic priming of relative clause attachments: persistence of structural configuration in sentence production , 2003, Cognition.

[17]  Edgar Erdfelder,et al.  G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[18]  Francesca M. M. Citron.  Neural correlates of written emotion word processing: A review of recent electrophysiological and hemodynamic neuroimaging studies , 2012, Brain and Language.

[19]  Gina R. Kuperberg,et al.  Neurophysiological Correlates of Comprehending Emotional Meaning in Context , 2009, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[20]  J. Woolley,et al.  Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[21]  D. Poeppel,et al.  The cortical organization of speech processing , 2007, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[22]  David E. Kieras,et al.  New methods in reading comprehension research , 1986 .

[23]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  ON COMPREHENDING SENTENCES: SYNTACTIC PARSING STRATEGIES. , 1979 .

[24]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Relative clause attachment in Dutch: On-line comprehension corresponds to corpus frequencies when lexical variables are taken into account , 2006 .

[25]  F. Ferreira,et al.  The role of working memory in syntactic ambiguity resolution: a psychometric approach. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[26]  K. Arnell,et al.  Capturing and holding attention: The impact of emotional words in rapid serial visual presentation , 2008, Memory & cognition.

[27]  A. Goldberg.  Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language , 2006 .

[28]  Janet D. Fodor,et al.  The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model , 1978, Cognition.

[29]  M. Brysbaert,et al.  The correspondence between sentence production and corpus frequencies in modifier attachment , 2002, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[30]  Sara C. Sereno,et al.  Early emotion word processing: Evidence from event-related potentials , 2009, Biological Psychology.

[31]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  Sentence processing: A tutorial review. , 1987 .

[32]  C. Clifton,et al.  Relative clause attachment in German, English, Spanish and French: Effects of position and length , 2015 .

[33]  Xingjia Shen.  Late assignment of syntax theory : evidence from Chinese and English , 2006 .

[34]  Michael K. Tanenhaus,et al.  Parsing in a Dynamical System: An Attractor-based Account of the Interaction of Lexical and Structural Constraints in Sentence Processing , 1997 .

[35]  Knud Lambrecht,et al.  Information structure and sentence form , 1994 .

[36]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using Multivariate Statistics , 1983 .

[37]  M. Pickering,et al.  An integrated theory of language production and comprehension. , 2013, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[38]  A Pollatsek,et al.  On the use of counterbalanced designs in cognitive research: a suggestion for a better and more powerful analysis. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[39]  Nino Grillo,et al.  A novel argument for the Universality of Parsing principles , 2014, Cognition.

[40]  R. Sánchez-Casas,et al.  Affective norms for 380 Spanish words belonging to three different semantic categories , 2012, Behavior Research Methods.

[41]  N J Pearlmutter,et al.  Recency and lexical preferences in Spanish , 1999, Memory & cognition.

[42]  K. Rayner,et al.  Frequency drives lexical access in reading but not in speaking: the frequency-lag hypothesis. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[43]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Exposure-based models of human parsing: Evidence for the use of coarse-grained (nonlexical) statistical records , 1995 .

[44]  F. Cuetos,et al.  Cross-linguistic differences in parsing: Restrictions on the use of the Late Closure strategy in Spanish , 1988, Cognition.

[45]  W. Sommer,et al.  The influence of emotional words on sentence processing: Electrophysiological and behavioral evidence , 2012, Neuropsychologia.

[46]  G. Kuperberg,et al.  Friendly drug-dealers and terrifying puppies: Affective primacy can attenuate the N400 effect in emotional discourse contexts , 2013, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[47]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using multivariate statistics, 5th ed. , 2007 .

[48]  Manuel Carreiras,et al.  Event-related potentials elicited during parsing of ambiguous relative clauses in Spanish. , 2004, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[49]  M. Brysbaert,et al.  Norms of valence and arousal for 14,031 Spanish words , 2016, Behavior Research Methods.

[50]  I. Fraga,et al.  Time course of gender agreement violations containing emotional words , 2015, Journal of Neurolinguistics.

[51]  Ana P. Piñeiro,et al.  Animacy in the adjunction of Spanish RCs to complex NPs , 2009 .

[52]  I. Fraga,et al.  El papel de la animacidad en la resolución de ambigüedades sintácticas en portugués europeo: evidencia en tareas de producción y comprensión , 2010 .

[53]  Daniel Jurafsky,et al.  A Probabilistic Model of Lexical and Syntactic Access and Disambiguation , 1996, Cogn. Sci..

[54]  G. Kuperberg,et al.  Vivid: How valence and arousal influence word processing under different task demands , 2016, Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience.