Celia M. Klin

Forward inferences: From activation to long‐term memory

Past research has been inconsistent regarding the extent to which forward inferences are activated and encoded during reading. To investigate the prevalence and the time course of forward inferences, 3 different tasks were employed. In Experiment 1, participants’ naming times were facilitated to a probe word when it represented a predicted action, both when that action was highly predictable and when it was only moderately predictable. In Experiments 2 and 3, participants were slow to read a subsequent sentence that contradicted the intended inference, indicating that the inference had been encoded and retained in working memory in both the high‐and low‐predictability conditions. In Experiment 4, the results of a recall task suggest that the high‐predictability forward inferences were encoded into the long‐term memory representation of the text. These findings suggest that forward inferences may be more prevalent and more persistent than has been indicated previously.

Causal inferences in reading: From immediate activation to long-term memory.

Three different tasks were used to investigate the time course of drawing causal inferences. Participants read passages that contained a causal coherence break that could be resolved by reactivating a concept presented earlier in the passage. In Experiment 1, participants named a probe word that represented the earlier mentioned cause more quickly after encountering the causal coherence break, suggesting that the causal concept had quickly been reactivated. In Experiment 2, participants were slow to read a sentence after the causal coherence break that contradicted the intended inference, indicating that the inference had been encoded and retained in working memory. In Experiment 3, the results of a recall task indicated that the causal link was also included in the long-term memory representation of the text.

Readers' sensitivity to linguistic cues in narratives: How salience influences anaphor resolution

Despite the general assumption that anaphoric inferences are necessary inferences, Levine, Guzmán, and Klin (2000) concluded that the probability of resolving noun phrase anaphors depends both on the degree of accessibility in memory of the antecedent concepts and the extent to which resolution is necessary to create a coherent discourse representation. Four experiments are presented in which the factors that influence readers’ standard of coherence are investigated. We examine the hypothesis that readers are more likely to resolve anaphors that are perceived as salient; salience was manipulated both with a syntactic focusing structure (wh- clefts) and with the addition of prenominal adjectival modifiers. The results of a probe recognition time task provide support for the hypothesis that a variety of linguistic cues serve asmental processing instructions (Givón, 1992), which instruct readers as to how much attention to devote to processing.

When Throwing a Vase Has Multiple Consequences: Minimal Encoding of Predictive Inferencest

In three experiments, we investigate the likelihood that predictive inferences are drawn when there is more than one consequence of the predictive context. Whereas a previous set of studies (Klin, Guzmán, & Levine, 1999) showed no facilitation of a naming probe (e.g., break) 500 ms after the predictive context (e.g., Steven threw the delicate vase), in Experiment 1 there was evidence of an inference 1500 ms after the predictive context. However, in Experiment 2, there was no evidence of an inference when the 1500-ms inter-stimulus interval contained additional text. To reduce task demands, the probe task was eliminated in Experiment 3. Readers slowed down on a line that contradicted the targeted inference, suggesting that they drew a predictive inference. We conclude that predictive inferences are more prevalent than has been assumed previously, but they may be minimally encoded when conditions are not optimal.

Texting insincerely

Text messaging is one of the most frequently used computer-mediated communication (CMC) methods. The rapid pace of texting mimics face-to-face communication, leading to the question of whether the critical non-verbal aspects of conversation, such as tone, are expressed in CMC. Much of the research in this domain has involved large corpus analyses, focusing on the contents of texts, but not how receivers comprehend texts. We ask whether punctuation - specifically, the period - may serve as a cue for pragmatic and social information. Participants read short exchanges in which the response either did or did not include a sentence-final period. When the exchanges appeared as text messages, the responses that ended with a period were rated as less sincere than those that did not end with a period. No such difference was found for handwritten notes. We conclude that punctuation is one cue used by senders, and understood by receivers, to convey pragmatic and social information. Participants read exchanges in which the response did or did not end with a period.Texts that ended with a period were rated as less sincere than those that did not.For handwritten notes, no such difference was found.

Perspective taking during reading: An on-line investigation of the illusory transparency of intention

Although proficient readers must be reasonably successful at keeping track of what information they share with characters and what information is privileged to them, there is evidence that they are unable to do so with complete accuracy. Keysar (1994) used off-line tasks to demonstrate that readers sometimes mistakenly use privileged information when evaluating a character’s interpretation of an ambiguous message. After we replicated Keysar’s (1994) findings (Experiment 1), the results of an on-line task indicated that this “illusory transparency of intention” extends to natural reading (Experiment 2). In Experiment 3, we provided preliminary support for the hypothesis that readers’ accuracy in assessing a given character’s perspective is influenced by whether or not that character is in the focus of the story. The results are discussed with regard to two competing theoretical views: the construal view and the standard view.

Full length articleTexting insincerely: The role of the period in text messaging

Text messaging is one of the most frequently used computer-mediated communication (CMC) methods. The rapid pace of texting mimics face-to-face communication, leading to the question of whether the critical non-verbal aspects of conversation, such as tone, are expressed in CMC. Much of the research in this domain has involved large corpus analyses, focusing on the contents of texts, but not how receivers comprehend texts. We ask whether punctuation - specifically, the period - may serve as a cue for pragmatic and social information. Participants read short exchanges in which the response either did or did not include a sentence-final period. When the exchanges appeared as text messages, the responses that ended with a period were rated as less sincere than those that did not end with a period. No such difference was found for handwritten notes. We conclude that punctuation is one cue used by senders, and understood by receivers, to convey pragmatic and social information. Participants read exchanges in which the response did or did not end with a period.Texts that ended with a period were rated as less sincere than those that did not.For handwritten notes, no such difference was found.

Seeing what they read and hearing what they say: Readers’ representation of the story characters’ world

Do readers “see” the words that story characters read and “hear” the words that they hear? Just as priming effects are reduced when stimuli are presented cross-modally on two different occasions, we found reduced transfer effects when story characters were described as experiencing stimuli cross-modally. In Experiment 1, a repeated phrase was described as being part of a spoken message in both Story A and Story B, and transfer effects were found. In Experiment 2, in contrast, when the phrase was described as a written note in one story and a spoken message in the other, reading-time results indicated that readers did not retrieve the meaning of the repeated phrase. The results are consistent with findings indicating that visual imagery simulates visual processing and that auditory imagery simulates auditory processing. We conclude that readers mentally simulate the perceptual details involved in story characters’ linguistic exchanges.

Maintaining global coherence in reading : The role of sentence boundaries

In four experiments, we examined the reinstatement of backgrounded information in locally coherent passages, investigating the influence of syntactic boundaries, such as periods, on the time course of this process. In Experiment 1, using a line-by-line reading paradigm, readers were delayed in noticing a contradiction on a target line when the sentence continued onto a posttarget line. Consistent with this, in Experiments 2A and 2B, the results of a recognition probe demonstrated that relevant concepts from long-term memory were not integrated immediately unless the contradiction was followed by a period. Experiment 3 demonstrated that sentence boundaries are sufficient to facilitate the integration of related background information but are not necessary; additional time served the same purpose. Consistent with a memory-based text-processing framework, it appears that the reactivation of related information is initiated automatically but that an integration stage is influenced by such factors as syntactic boundaries.

When story characters communicate: readers’ representations of characters’ linguistic exchanges

Klin, Ralano, and Weingartner (2007) found transfer effects when a phrase, described as part of a note one character had left for another, was repeated across two passages. However, when the phrase was part of a note in story A and part of a conversation in story B, transfer effects were eliminated (Klin & Drumm, 2010). Klin and Drumm concluded that readers encoded the perceptual features of story characters’ linguistic exchanges and that the mismatch (visual vs. auditory) eliminated transfer effects. The present experiments support this conclusion and also demonstrate that readers encode details of the social interaction that surrounds the characters’ linguistic exchanges: Effects were reduced when the phrase in story A was part of a direct social interaction between the characters (e.g., phone conversation), whereas in story B, the interaction was indirect (e.g., voicemail). More generally, readers are exquisitely tuned to subtle aspects of characters’ linguistic exchanges.