以眼動型態探討背景知識對詞彙辨識的影響

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：17

、訪客IP：3.12.160.97

姓名

簡郁芩(Yu-Cin Jian) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

學習與教學研究所

論文名稱

以眼動型態探討背景知識對詞彙辨識的影響
(Investigating the effects of background knowledge on word recognition: Evidence from eye movements)

相關論文

★ 以同儕互評與討論提升小六學童之寫作表現 ~以行動學習輔具教室為例	★ 從眼動資料探討字形與聲旁在篇章閱讀的效果
★ 從眼動資料探討連接詞與閱讀歷程之關係	★ EFL大學生閱讀英文的眼動資料分析
★ 閱讀教學與國民小學學童閱讀動機及行為的關係—以2005年PIRLS資料為例	★ 合作寫作對於國小學童科學概念學習之影響
★ 影響國小學童家長送子女參加課後補習之相關因素研究---以桃園縣中壢市為例	★ 國小學童圖文閱讀的理解策略
★ 幼童敘說書面故事之後設認知表現	★ 新移民家庭子女口語敘說能力之發展
★ 記憶廣度與語境效應對閱讀歧義句的影響：來自眼動的證據	★ 由句法探討手語聽障生書面語閱讀的現象
★ 圖文提示對學童閱讀科學說明文記憶與理解之影響	★ 英文閱讀能力與先備知識對閱讀物理篇章推論的影響
★ 正負數量表徵的心理數線發展	★ 識字教學法與口語詞彙能力對新移民女性中文識字學習之影響

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

本研究目的是探討背景知識對篇章中閱讀科學詞彙與一般性詞彙辨識的影響。實驗一藉由背景知識高低的研究生閱讀物理文章中的不熟悉物理詞彙和一般性詞彙，發現在閱讀一般性說明文能力相當的條件下，讀者遇到不熟悉的物理詞彙時，兩組讀者第一個凝視點的凝視時間沒有統計上的顯著差異，都接近250毫秒，與文獻上的資料相符，代表在處理「字」的階段上，兩組讀者都能自動化地辨識字義。但無論是背景知識高或低的讀者，閱讀不熟悉的物理詞彙在初始處理階段的第一次連續凝視時間都較物理文章中的一般性詞彙來的長，達到統計上的顯著差異，顯示在「詞」的階段上，不熟悉的物理詞彙是兩組讀者都無法自動化辨識的。然而，背景知識高的讀者較背景知識低的讀者在閱讀不熟悉的物理詞上有較低的重新閱讀總凝視時間和回視率，顯示在「整合語義」的階段上，背景知識高的讀者較能順暢地進行閱讀並統整語義。整體而言，閱讀文章中的陌生詞彙，背景知識的效果主要發揮在晚期整合語義的階段上。此外，實驗一結果顯示，兩組讀者閱讀物理文章中的一般性詞彙在晚期處理階段有統計上的顯著差異，背景知識低者重新閱讀的凝視時間較長，回視率較高。造成這種差異的原因是否是因為在物理文章的環境下，辨識一般性詞彙會受到物理詞彙的影響？因此，實驗二探討在不同文章內容下，一般性詞彙的辨識是否會受到影響。實驗結果顯示，背景知識低的大學生閱讀物理和非物理文章中相同的一般性詞彙，在初始處理階段沒有差異，因為讀者辨識一般性詞彙的能力已達自動化，但是在晚處理階段，一般性詞彙在物理文章中的重新閱讀總凝視時間以及回視率還是較在非物理文章中來的多。實驗二再次支持了實驗一的結果：閱讀一般性詞彙的晚期處理歷程會受到不同文章內容與背景知識的影響。

摘要(英)

Two experiments examined the effects of background knowledge on word recognition during silent reading. Readers’ eye movements were monitored as they read physical texts. In Experiment 1, both the high- and low-knowledge graduate readers read physical texts that contained the unfamiliar physical words and the common words. The results suggested that the two groups spent on unfamiliar physical words did not differ in first fixation durations. Both of them were closed to average 250 milliseconds. It showed that at the character recognition stage, both groups could recognize Chinese characters automatically. But both high- and low-knowledge readers spent much first gaze fixation durations on unfamiliar physical words than common words. It showed that at the word stage, both groups could not recognize the unfamiliar physical words automatically. However, the high- knowledge readers could use their background knowledge to integrate the information of the physical texts, so their rereading time was shorter, and the regression rate was smaller. Moreover, when low-knowledge readers read common words, they also spent much rereading time and regression rate than high-knowledge readers. It seemed that the common words would be influenced by the physical contexts. Therefore, In Experiment 2, low-knowledge readers read both physical texts and non-physical texts that contained the same common words. The results suggested that readers spent more rereading time and higher regression rate, when common words were contained in physical texts. Overall, context effects and background knowledge influenced the common words’ reading processes.

關鍵字(中)

★ 眼動型態
★ 背景知識
★ 詞彙辨識

關鍵字(英)

★ eye movements
★ background knowledge
★ word recognition

論文目次

目次
第一章緒論……………………………………………………………………….1
第一節研究背景與研究動機………………………………………………..1
第二節研究目的與研究問題………………………………………………..2
第二章文獻探討…………………………………………………………………..4
第一節背景知識對詞彙辨識與閱讀理解的影響…………………………..4
第二節詞彙熟悉度對詞彙辨識與閱讀理解的影響………………………10
第三節中文閱讀的基本眼動型態與影響因素……………………………13
第三章研究方法、結果與討論…………………………………………………18
第一節實驗一………………………………………………………………18
第二節實驗二………………………………………………………………41
第四章綜合討論…………………………………………………………………48
參考文獻……………………………………………………………………………54
附錄一統計摘要表………………………..…….……………………………....60
附錄二問卷………………………………..…….……………………………... 64
附錄三實驗一材料………………………..…….……………………………... 67
附錄四實驗二材料………………………..…….……………………………... 78
表目次
表2-2-1 Chaffin等人 (2001) 目標詞處理時間的平均數與標準差……………11
表3-1-1 兩組讀者閱讀一般性說明文整體眼動指標的平均數與標準差………27
表3-1-2 兩組讀者閱讀物理文章與一般性說明文的平均數與標準差………....29
表3-1-3 兩組讀者讀不熟悉物理詞與一般性詞彙的平均數與標準差……..…..32
表3-1-4 背景知識高低讀者在不熟悉的物理詞彙之凝視位置百分比….......….34
表3-1-5 背景知識高低讀者在一般性詞彙之凝視位置百分比……………..…..35
表3-1-6 背景知識高者讀不同熟悉度的物理詞彙之平均數與標準差……….....36
表3-2-1 背景低讀者讀兩類文章的一般性詞彙之平均數與標準差………….…44
表3-2-2 實驗一與實驗二各眼動指標整理表…………………………..……...…47

參考文獻

參考文獻
中文詞知識庫小組（1998）。詞頻詞典技術報告。台北市：中央研究院。
中文詞知識庫小組（1999）。CKIP中文自動斷詞系統1.0版。台北市：中央研究院。
李佳穎（1995）。漢語組合詞與成語詞在心理辭典中的表徵方式。國立中正大學心理學研究所碩士論文。未出版。
胡志偉（1989）。中文詞的辨識歷程。中華心理學刊，31，33-39。
柯華葳（1999）。閱讀能力的發展。載於曾進興(主編)語言病理學基礎第三卷。台北：心理出版社。
柯華葳、陳明蕾和廖家寧（2005）。詞頻、詞彙類型與眼球運動型態：來自篇章閱讀的證據，中華心理學刊，47，381-398。
張筱莉和林陳涌（2001）。學童眼中的科學專有名詞。科學教育學刊，9(3)，219-234。
程祥徽和田小琳（1992）。現代漢語。台北：書林出版。
趙元任和丁邦新（2002）。中國話的文法。香港：香港中文大學出版。
陳郁夫，羅明，蔡芳之，高千惠，曾昱翔和胡志偉（2004）。從眼動資料看讀者背景知識對其閱讀歷程的影響。第43屆台灣心理學年會會議手冊暨會議論文摘要。台北市：政治大學。
蔡介立（2000）。從眼動控制探討中文閱讀的訊息處理歷程：應用眼動誘發呈現技術之系列研究。國立政治大學心理學研究所博士論文。未出版。
鄭昭明（1993）。認知心理學。台北：桂冠出版。
Adams, M. J. (1990). Putting word recognition in perspective. In Adams, M. J. (Eds.), Beginning to read : Thinking and learning about print . (pp. 3-11). Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
Allington, R. L. (2002). What I’ve learned about effective reading instruction. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 740-747.
Andrews, S., Miller, B., & Rayner, K. (2004). Eye movements and morphological segmentation of compound words: There is a mouse in mousetrap. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16(1/2), 285-311.
Balota, D. A., Pilotti, M. P., & Cortese, M. J. (2001). Subjective frequency estimates for 2,938 monosyllabic words. Memory & Cognition, 29(4), 639-647.
Bell, L. C., & Perfetti, C.A. (1994). Reading skills: Some adult comparisons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 244-255.
Best, R. M., Rowe, M. P., Ozuru, Y., & McNamara, D. S. (2005). Deep-level comprehension of science texts: The role of the reader and the text. Topics in Language Disorders, 25, 65-83.
Brand-Gruwel, S., Aarnoutse, C. A. J., & Van den Bos, K. P. (1998). Improving text comprehension strategies in reading and listening settings. Learning and Iinstruction, 8, 63-81.
Caillies, S., Denhiere, G., & Kintsch, W. (2002). The effect of prior knowledge on understanding from text: Evidence from primed recognition. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 267-286.
Chaffin, R., Morris, R. K., & Seely, R. E. (2001). Learning new word meanins from context: A study on eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(1), 225-235.
Garaway, G. B. (1994). Language, culture, and attitude in mathematics and science learning: A review of the literature. The Journal of Research and Development in Education, 27(2), 102-111.
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1984). Resolving 20 years of inconsistent interactions between lexical familiarity and orthography, concreteness, and polysemy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 256-284.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: The Falmer Press.
Hoosain, R. (1992). Psychological reality of the word in Chinese. In H.-C. Chen & O. J.-L. (Eds.), Language processing in Chinese (pp. 111-130). Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland.
Irwin, D. E. (2004). Fixation location and fixation duration as indices of cognitive procesing. In John, M., Henderson & Ferreira, F. (Eds.), The interface of language, vision, and action : eye movements and the visual world.(pp. 105-133). New York : Psychology Press.
Juhasz, B. J., & Rayner, K. (2003). Investigating the effects of a set of intercorrelated variables on eye fixation duration in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology : Learning, Memory , and Cognition, 29(6), 1312-1318.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329-354.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1987). The psychology of reading and language comprehension. Boston：Allyn and Bacon.
Kaakinen, J. K., & Hyona, J. (2002). Perspective effects on online text processing. Discourse Processes,33(2),159-173.
Kaakinen, J. K., Hyona, J., & Keenan, J. M. (2003). How prior knowledge, WMC, and relevance of information affect eye fixations in expository text. Journal of Experimental Psychology : Learning, Memory , and Cognition, 29(3), 447-457.
Kajii, N., Nazir, T. A., & Osaka, N. (2001). Eye movement control in reading unspaced text : the case of the Japanese script. Vision Research, 41, 2503-251.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
Kintsch, W. (2005). An Overview of top-down and bottom-up effects in comprehension: the CI perspective. Discourse Processes, 39, 125-128.
Ko. H., & Chen, M. (2005). The role of word during reading Chinese: Evidence from eye movements. Paper presented at 2005 European Conference on Eye Movement, Bern, Switzerland.
Libben, G., & Jarema, G. (2002). Mental lexicon research in the new millennium. Brain and Language, 81, 2-11.
Libben, G., & Jarema, G. (2004). Conceptions and questions concerning morphological processing. Brain and Language, 81, 2-8.
Mannes, S., & Kintsch, W. (1987). Knowledge organization and text organization. Cognition and Instruction, 4, 91-115.
Marslen-Wilson, W., Tyler, L. K., Waksler, R., & Older, L. (1994). Morphology and meaning in the English lexicon. Psychological Review, 101, 3-33.
McNamara, D. S. (2001). Reading both high-coherence and low-coherence texts: Effects of text sequence and prior knowledge. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55(2),51-62.
McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N. B., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 1-43.
Miller, G. A. (1996). The science of words. 洪蘭 (譯) (2002)。詞的學問。台北：遠流出版。
Nagy, W. E., Herman, P., & Anderson, R. C. (1985). Learning new words from context. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 304-33.
O'Reilly, T., & McNamara, D.S. (2002). What's a science student to do? Proceedings of the Twenty-fourth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 726-731.
Peng, D., Liu, Y., & Wang, C.(1999). How is access representation organized? The relation of polymorphemic words and their morphemes in Chinese. In J. Wang, A. W. Inhoff, & H.-C. Chen (Eds.), Reading Chinese script: A cognitive analysis (pp. 65-89). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Perfetti, C. A., & Tan, L.-H. (1999). The constituency model of Chinese word identification. In J. Wang, A. W. Inhoff, & H.-C. Chen (Eds.), Reading Chinese script: A cognitive analysis (pp. 116-134). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Radach, R., & Kennedy, A. (2004). Theoretical perspectives on eye movements in reading: Past controversies, current issues, an agenda for future research. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,16, 3-26.
Rayner, K. (1979). Eye guidance in reading: Fixation locations within words. Perception, 8, 21-3.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing :20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 24, 372-422.
Rayner, K., & Juhasz, B. J. (2004). Eye movement in reading: Old questions and new directions. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,16, 340-352.
Rayner, K., & Morris, R. K. (1992). Do eye movements reflect higher order processes in reading? In H.-C. Chen & O. J.-L. (Eds.), Language processing in Chinese (pp. 179-190). Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland.
Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1987). Eye movements in reading: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Eds.), Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp.327-362). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Solso, R. L., & MacLin, M. K. (2002). Experimental psychology: A case approach (7th edition). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Tsai, C.-H. (1996). Effects of semantic transparency and morphological structure on the representation and recognition of Chinese disyllabic words. In T.-F. Cheng, Y. Li, & H. Zhang (Eds.), Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of the Fourth International Conference on Chinese Linguistics and the Seventh North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics: Vol. 2 (pp. 326-343). University of Southern California.
Tsai, C.-H. (2001). Word identification and eye movements in reading Chinese: A modeling approach. Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Williams, R. S., & Morris, R. K. (2004). Eye movements, word familiarity, and vocabulary acquisition. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16(1/2), 312-339.
Wylie, J., & McGuinness, C. (2004). The interactive effects of prior knowledge and text structure on memory for cognitive psychology texts. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 497-514.
Yang, H.-M., & McConkie, G. W. (1999). Reading Chinese: Some basic eye-movement characteristics. In J. Wang, A. W. Inhoff, & H.-C. Chen (Eds.), Reading Chinese script: A cognitive analysis (pp. 207-222). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

指導教授

辜玉旻、柯華葳
(Yu-Min Ku、Hwa-Wei Ko)

審核日期

2006-6-20

推文