Advances in prosodic annotation : A test of inter-coder reliability for the RaP ( Rhythm and Pitch ) and ToBI ( Tones and Break Indices ) transcription systems

UNAVAILABLE The influence of memory load on heuristic interpretation processes Peter Ward (University of Glasgow) & Patrick Sturt (University of Edinburgh) peter@psy.gla. ac.uk Recent research by Ferreira and colleagues has suggested that there is a systematic tendency to misinterpret syntactically unambiguous sentences when the correct interpretation conflicts with world knowledge. In a rating study, examining sentences like 1 below, readers rated passive implausible sentences (1d) as plausible approximately 25% of the time [A]. Moreover, in [B], listeners answered incorrectly 24% of the time when asked to identify the agent of the sentence in a thematic role judgement task [C]. The results were discussed in terms of heuristic, non-syntactic interpretation processes, in this case the tendency to assign an Agent-Verb-Theme interpretation to a Noun-Verb-Noun sequence. However, these judgment data do not tell us how, or whether, the heuristics interacted with syntax during online processing. Three experiments attempted to replicate these findings and to investigate the time-course of the developing interpretation. Experiment 1 was an off-line questionnaire study in which participants read sentences like (1), given below in its four conditions. In contrast to Ferreira and Stacey's results, plausibility ratings indicated high levels of correct interpretation across conditions; the two implausible conditions both received statistically equivalent low ratings, and the two plausible conditions both received statistically equivalent high ratings. Experiment 2 used word-by-word self-paced reading with 24 materials selected from Experiment 1. After each trial, participants had to identify the agent or patient of the sentence [C]. Since correct syntactic processing should result in plausibility differences at the second NP, we measured reading times on the head noun (i.e. "child" in 1d, below), to check for early, grammatical processing, and the three following words, to allow for spillover. Accuracy of role judgements was reliably higher for plausible than the implausible sentences. The difference was numerically greater for the passives (72% vs. 90%) than for the actives (82% vs. 91%), though the two factors did not interact. In the reading times, there was a main effect of plausibility, with a slowdown for the implausible conditions 2 and 3 words downstream of the critical word, which was statistically equivalent for both actives and passives. Experiment 3 increased syntactic load by embedding the same 24 materials in a more complex sentence frame [D]. This time, there was a reliable interaction in the judgment data, with a greater disadvantage for the implausible conditions in the passives (59% vs. 83%) than the actives (67% vs. 80%). As in Experiment 2, there was an RT effect of plausibility 3 words downstream of the critical word, again not interacting with the active/passive manipulation. Our results suggest a role of memory load in the use of heuristics. In our Experiment 1, participants were free to re-read the sentence while rating plausibility, and their judgments were clearly based on syntax. The self-paced reading experiments precluded such re-reading, thus increasing memory load, and there was reliable evidence of misinterpretation when memory resources were further strained with a syntactic manipulation (Experiment 3; see also [E]). Additionally, the reading time data suggest that syntax influences the developing interpretation during on-line processing, even under conditions of high load. Example: (1) a) Active Plausible The soldier protected the child during the battle b) Active Implausible The child protected the soldier during the battle c) Passive Plausible The child was protected by the soldier during the battle d) Passive Implausible The soldier was protected by the child during the battle