English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Conference Paper

Assessing the time course of the influence of featural, distributional and spatial representations during reading

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons135817

Guerra,  Ernesto
Psychology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
Cognitive Interaction Technology Excellence Cluster, Bielefeld University;

/persons/resource/persons79

Huettig,  Falk
Psychology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
The Cultural Brain, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)

guerra_huettig_knoeferle_2014.pdf
(Publisher version), 331KB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Guerra, E., Huettig, F., & Knoeferle, P. (2014). Assessing the time course of the influence of featural, distributional and spatial representations during reading. In P. Bello, M. Guarini, M. McShane, & B. Scassellati (Eds.), Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2014) (pp. 2309-2314). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society. Retrieved from https://mindmodeling.org/cogsci2014/papers/402/.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0024-2A70-C
Abstract
What does semantic similarity between two concepts mean? How could we measure it? The way in which semantic similarity is calculated might differ depending on the theoretical notion of semantic representation. In an eye-tracking reading experiment, we investigated whether two widely used semantic similarity measures (based on featural or distributional representations) have distinctive effects on sentence reading times. In other words, we explored whether these measures of semantic similarity differ qualitatively. In addition, we examined whether visually perceived spatial distance interacts with either or both of these measures. Our results showed that the effect of featural and distributional representations on reading times can differ both in direction and in its time course. Moreover, both featural and distributional information interacted with spatial distance, yet in different sentence regions and reading measures. We conclude that featural and distributional representations are distinct components of semantic representation.