博碩士論文 971407008 詳細資訊




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:7 、訪客IP:3.227.254.12
姓名 張毓仁(Yu-jen Chang)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 學習與教學研究所
論文名稱 成人與小六學童在中文多義詞語意激發和選擇的比較
(Semantic Activation and Selection of Chinese Polysemy: A Comparison between Adults and Sixth-graders)
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
★ 以眼動型態探討背景知識對詞彙辨識的影響★ 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★ 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★ 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
★ 國小學生對統計圖理解層次之研究★ 國小學童對幽默漫畫閱讀歷程之研究
★ 線上閱讀測驗之發展與學生能力表現之探究★ 關係子題及線圖對國小數學低成就學生理解比較型文字題之影響
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]
  1. 本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
  2. 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。
  3. 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) 本研究旨在分析識字能力對左、右半腦在中文多義詞多重意義處理的影響。研究者以中文非均勢多義詞為實驗材料,採用語意促發典範和分視野技術,並請參與者進行詞彙判斷作業,藉以比較不同識字能力參與者在早期自動化語意激發和後期控制式語意配對的處理機制下,對不同語意關聯程度的意義之反應時間。
實驗一進行識字能力、刺激起始時距及語意關聯程度三個變項的操弄,同時控制參與者非語文智商。實驗一發現「識字能力和刺激起始時距」及「語意關聯程度和刺激起始時距」兩者出現交互作用,這顯示出識字能力、語意關聯程度在多義詞之不同時序階段的語意處理存在不同程度的影響。為了釐清實驗一的影響效果,實驗二、三分別聚焦早期語意激發和後期語意配對的兩個不同階段,探討不同識字能力參與者在多義詞語意處理時,左、右半腦的處理情形。實驗二、三都是操弄識字能力、不同視野及語意關聯程度三個變項,並控制參與者的非語文智商。實驗二發現識字能力、不同視野及語意關聯程度三個主要效果,這顯示出在早期的自動化語意激發階段,不同識字能力參與者均可以激發多義詞的主要、次要意義;左半腦的語意激發速度明顯快於右半腦;而識字能力的提升加快意義被激發的速度。實驗三的主要發現則為「不同視野和語意關聯程度」的交互作用,這顯示出右半腦同時維持主要、次要意義的促發效果;但是,左半腦卻僅能維持主要意義的促發效果,次要意義則是受到抑制。
綜合上述,本研究發現不同視野、語意關聯程度和識字能力都會影響多義詞的擷取,且這三個因素也隨著不同語意處理機制而呈現不同的影響型態。此外,識字能力不是影響中文詞彙語意處理的關鍵要素。最後,研究者根據限制,提供未來研究若干建議。
摘要(英) Using the semantic priming paradigm, this study examined the effect of Chinese character recognition ability on hemispheric processing of Chinese polysemy. The variables investigated included stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA), the degree of meaning relatedness of the target prime pairs, visual field and character recognition ability.
Three experiments were conducted to facilitate the observation of the aforementioned variables. In each experiment, the participants, 36 adults and 72 sixth-graders, all took the Chinese Character Size Test and the Raven Progressive Matrices Test. They were then grouped into three groups based on their performance on the Chinese Character Size Test: adults with normal character size group (ANCSG), sixth-graders with high character size group (SHCSG) and sixth-graders with average character size group (SACSG). All the groups were equivalent in their non-verbal IQ.
Experiment 1 manipulated SOA (250 ms vs. 750 ms), meaning relatedness (dominate vs. subordinate vs. non-related) and character size (ANCSG vs. SHCSG vs. SACSG). The results revealed that character recognition ability and the degree of meaning relatedness respectively affected the processing of polysemy, but their effects were modulated by SOA. In order to further explore the different semantic processing mechanisms for hemispheric asymmetries, Experiment 2 employed a short SOA of 250 ms (automatic spreading activation mechanism) while Experiment 3 employed a long SOA of 750 ms (controlled semantic matching mechanism). Hemispheric contributions were pinpointed in both experiments by using the divided visual field technique. Moreover, visual field (LFV vs. RFV), meaning relatedness (dominate vs. subordinate vs. non-related) and character size (ANCSG vs. SHCSG vs. SACSG) were manipulated in both experiments.
The results of Experiment 2 showed that in the automatic spreading activation mechanism, visual field, meaning relatedness and character size all produced a significant main effect. These findings suggest that readers with higher character size would activate faster the multiple meanings of polysemy. The speed of semantic activation in the left hemisphere is faster than that in the right hemisphere. In addition, the multiple meanings of polysemy are activated at different levels, depending on the degree of meaning relatedness. The outcomes of Experiment 3 recognized a significant interaction effect of visual field and character size at 750 ms SOA. This situation suggests that, in a controlled semantic matching mechanism, the priming effects of both dominate and subordinate meanings can be observed in the right hemisphere. Only the priming effect of dominate meaning can be found in the left hemisphere.
In conclusion, the access of the multiple meanings of polysemy is subject to the influence of character size, visual field and meaning relatedness respectively. The influence patterns of these three variables vary in accordance to the semantic processing mechanisms at the early or late stages. Based on the findings and limitations of the current study, the researcher proposes suggestions for related research in the future.
關鍵字(中) ★ 多義詞
★ 語意激發
★ 識字能力
★ 分視野
關鍵字(英) ★ polysemy
★ semantic priming
★ Character recognition ability
★ divided visual field
論文目次 目 錄
第一章 緒論…………………………………………………………1
第一節 研究背景與動機……………………………………1
第二節 研究目的、問題與假設………………………5
第三節 名詞釋義…………………………………………………7
第二章 文獻探討…………………………………………………9
第一節 語意促發機制…………………………………………9
第二節 識字能力和語意關係的發展………………12
第三節 歧義詞的語意處理歷程………………………15
第四節 左右半腦在詞彙語意處理的不對稱性…18
第五節 文獻總結…………………………………………………24
第三章 實驗一………………………………………………………27
第一節 實驗方法……………………………………………………27
第二節 預期結果……………………………………………………33
第三節 實驗結果……………………………………………………34
第四節 討論……………………………………………………………39
第四章 實驗二A……………………………………………………43
第一節 實驗方法…………………………………………………44
第二節 預期結果…………………………………………………47
第三節 實驗結果…………………………………………………48
第四節 討論…………………………………………………………53
第五章 實驗二B…………………………………………………56
第一節 實驗方法…………………………………………………57
第二節 預期結果…………………………………………………60
第三節 實驗結果…………………………………………………60
第四節 討論…………………………………………………………65
第六章 綜合討論…………………………………………………68
參考文獻…………………………………………………………………74
附錄…………………………………………………………………………81
附錄一 語意差異量表的歧義詞詞組 (預試材料)……………81
附錄二 中文語詞語意差異量表………………………………………………83
附錄三 多義詞詞組的語意差異分析摘要表 (paired-t檢定)………………90
附錄四 實驗材料詞組的詞頻、首字字頻和筆畫、次字筆畫摘要表…………98
附錄五 統計分析摘要表………………………………………………102
參考文獻 李姝慧、陳修元、周泰立(2009)。國小五年級孩童與成人的識字能力對中文字語意處理之效應的差異。中華心理衛生學刊,22(4),345-382。
吳淑娟(2001)。國小閱讀理解困難學童之詞彙能力分析研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文,未出版。
周台傑(1993)。國民小學國語文成就測驗編製報告。中國測驗學會年刊,40,77-99。
林寶貴、楊慧敏、許秀英(1995)。台灣區中華國語文能力之編製及相關因素研究。特殊教育研究學刊,12,1-24。
洪儷瑜、王瓊珠、張郁雯、陳秀芬(2006)。識字量估計測驗指導手冊。教育部特殊教育工作小組,未出版。
洪國鈞、李姝慧、陳修元、周泰立(2010)。語意部件與關聯強度對成人與國小五年級孩童漢字語意處理效應的差異。中華心理學刊,52,327-344。
胡志偉、陳貽照、張世華、宋永麒(1996)。中文多字多義詞自由聯想常模。中華心理學刊,38(2),67-168。
翁巧涵、陳修元、周泰立、李姝慧(2011)。國小三年級兒童識字能力與語意關係對中文語意處理的影響。中華心理學刊,53(3),293-307。
袁暉(主編) (2001)。現代漢語多義詞詞典。中國太原市:書海出版社。
張嘉文(主編)(1996)。辭海。新北市:鐘文出版社。
教育部(2007)。教育部重編國語辭典修訂本網路版。http://dict.revised.moe.edu.tw/
陳明蕾、王學誠、柯華葳(2009)。中文語意空間建置及心理效度驗證:以潛在語意分析技術為基礎。中華心理學刊,51(4),415-435。
陳榮華、陳心怡(2006)。瑞文氏標準矩陣推理測驗平行本(SPM-P)。臺北市:中國行為科學社。
陳榮華、陳心怡(2006)。瑞文氏標準矩陣推理測驗提升本(SPM+)。臺北市:中國行為科學社。
黃瑋苓(2004)。普通學生與閱讀障礙學生之單位詞、識. 字、詞彙和閱讀理解能力之比較研究。特殊教育與復健學報,12,31-53。
錡寶香(2000)。國小低閱讀能力學童語言能力之研究。特殊教育研究學刊,20,69-96。
Abernethy, M., & Coney, J. (1996). Semantic category priming in the left cerebral hemisphere. Neuropsychologia, 34, 339–350.
Anaki, D., Faust, M., & Kravetz, S. (1998). Cerebral hemispheric asymmetries in processing lexical metaphors. Neuropsychologia, 36, 691–700.
Atchley R. A., & Keeney, M., & Burgess, C. (1999). Cerebral hemispheric mechanisms linking ambiguous word meaning retrieval and creativity. Brain and Cognition, 40, 479–499.
Atchley, R. A., Burgess, C., & Keeney, M. (1999). The effect of time course and context on the facilitation of semantic features in the cerebral hemispheres. Neuropsychology, 13, 389–403.
Audet, C., Driessen, N., & Burgess, C., (1998). Evaluating semantic neighbourhood effects in categorical and locative priming in the cerebral hemispheres. Brain and Cognition, 37, 67–69.
Beeman, M., Friedman, R. B., Grafman, J., Perez, E., Diamond, S., & Lindsay, M. B. (1994). Summation priming and coarse semantic coding in the right hemisphere. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 6, 26–45.
Beeman, M. J. (1998). Coarse semantic coding and discourse comprehension. In M. Beeman & C. Chiarello (Eds.), Getting it right: The cognitive neuroscience of right hemisphere language comprehension (pp. 225–284). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bilenko, N. Y., Grindrod, C. M., Myers, E. B., & Blumstein, S. E. (2009). Neural correlates of semantic competition during processing of ambiguous words. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 21(5), 960–975.
Booth, J. R., Lu, D., Burman, D. D., Chou, T. L., Jin, Z., Peng, D. L., Zhang, L., et al. (2006). Specialization of phonological and semantic processing in Chinese word reading. Brain Research, 1071(1), 197-207.
Bouaffre, S. & Faita-Ainseba, F. (2007). Hemispheric differences in the time-course of semantic priming processes: Evidence from event-related potentials (ERPs). Brain and Cognition, 63, 123–135.
Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (1993). The processing nature of the N400: Evidence from masked priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 33–44.
Brown, C. M., Hagoort, P., & Chwilla, D. J. (2000). An event-related brain potential analysis of visual word priming effects. Brain and Cognition, 72, 158–190.
Burgess C., & Chiarello, C. (1996). Neurocognitive mechanisms underlying metaphor comprehension and other figurative language. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 11, 67–84.
Burgess, C., & Simpson, G. B. (1988). Cerebral hemispheric mechanisms in the retrieval of ambiguous word meanings. Brain and Language, 33, 86–103.
Cain, K. (2006). Individual differences in children’s memory and reading comprehension: An investigation of semantic and inhibitory deficits. Memory, 14(5), 553-569.
Cao, F., Peng, D., Liu, L., Jin, Z., Fan, N., Deng, Y., & Booth, J. R. (2009). Developmental differences of neurocognitive networks for phonological and semantic processing in Chinese word reading. Human Brain Mapping, 30, 797-809.
Chiarello, C. (1985). Hemisphere dynamics in the lexical access: Automatic and controlled priming. Brain and Language, 26, 146–172.
Chiarello, C., & Richards, L. (1992). Another look at categorical priming in the cerebral hemispheres. Neuropsychologia, 30, 381–392.
Chiarello, C., Burgess, C., Richards, L., & Pollock, A. (1990). Semantic and associative priming in the cerebral hemispheres: Some words do some don’t, . . . sometimes, some places. Brain and Language, 38, 75–104.
Chiarello, C., Liu, S., Shears, C., Quan, N., & Kacinik, N. (2003). Priming of strong semantic relations in the left and right visual fields: a time-course investigation. Neuropsychologia, 41, 721–732.
Chiarello, C., Maxfield, L., & Kahan, T. (1995). Initial right hemisphere activation of subordinate word meanings is not due to homotopic callosal inhibition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2, 375–80.
Chiarello, C., Richards, L., & Pollock, A., (1992). Semantic additivity and semantic inhibition: dissociable processes in the cerebral hemispheres? Brain and Language, 42, 52–76.
Chou, T. L., Booth, J. R., Burman, D. D., Bitan, T., Bigio, J. D., Lu, D., & Cone, N. E. (2006). Developmental changes in the neural correlates of semantic processing. Neuroimage, 29, 1141-1149.
Chou, T. L., Booth, J. R., Bitan, T., Burman, D. D., Bigio, J. D., Cone, N. E., Lu, D., & Cao, F. (2006). Developmental and Skill Effects on the Neural Correlates of Semantic Processing to Visually Presented Words. Human Brain Mapping, 27, 915-924.
Chwilla, D. J., Hagoort, P. & Brown, C. M. (1998). The mechanism underlying backward priming in a lexical decision task: spreading activation versus semantic matching. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51A, 531–560.
Collins, M., & Coney, J. (1998). Inter-hemispheric communication is via direct connections. Brain and Language, 64, 28–52.
Collins, M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407–428.
Collins, M., (1999). Differences in semantic category priming in the left and right cerebral hemispheres under automatic and controlled processing conditions. Neuropsychologia, 37, 1071–1085.
Copland, D., Chenery, H. J., & Murdoch, B. E. (2002). Hemispheric contributions to lexical ambiguity resolution: evidence from individuals with complex language impairment following left-hemisphere lesions. Brain and Language, 81, 131–143.
Copland, D.A., de Zubicaray, G. I., McMahon, K., Wilson, S.J., Eastburn, M., Chenery, H.J. (2003). Brain activity during automatic semantic priming revealed by event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging. NeuroImage, 20, 302–310.
Copland, D.A., de Zubicaray, G. I., McMahon, K., Eastburn, M. (2007). Neural correlates of semantic priming for ambiguous words: An event-related fMRI study. Brain Research, 1131, 163–172.
Deacon, D., Grose-Fifer, J., Yang, C. M., Stanick, V., Hewitt, S., & Dynowska, A. (2004). Evidence for a new conceptualization of semantic representation in the left and right cerebral hemispheres. Cortex, 40(3), 467–478.
Deacon, D., Hewitt, S., Yang, C.H., & Nagata, M. (2000). Event-related potential indices of semantic priming using masked and unmasked words: evidence that the N400 does not reflect a post-lexical process. Cognitive Brain Research, 9, 137–146.
de Groot, A. M. B. (1984). Primed lexical decisions: Combined effects of the proportion of related prime–target pairs and the stimulus-onset asynchrony of prime and target. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36A, 253–280.
den Heyer, K., Briand, K., & Dannenbring, G. (1983). Strategic factors in a lexical-decision task: Evidence for automatic and attention-driven processes. Memory and Cognition, 11, 374–381.
Duffy, S. A., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 429-446.
Fassbinder, W., & Tompkins, C. A. (2006). Hemispheric differences in word-meaning processing: alternative interpretations of current evidence. Aphasiology, 20, 110–122.
Faust, M., & Lavidor, M. (2003). Semantically convergent and semantically divergent priming in the cerebral hemispheres: lexical decision and semantic judgment. Cognitive Brain Research, 17(3), 585–597.
Hill, H., Ott, F., & Weisbrod, M. (2005). SOA-dependent N400 and P300 semantic priming effects using pseudoword primes and a delayed lexical decision. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 56, 209–221.
Hill, H., Strube, M., Roesch-Ely, D., & Weisbrod, M. (2002). Automatic vs. controlled processes in semantic priming-differentiation by event-related potentials. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 44, 197–218.
Hines, D., Czerwinski, M., Sawyer, P. K., & Dwyer, M. (1986). Automatic semantic priming: effect of category exemplar level and word association level. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 12, 370–379.
Holcomb, P. J. (1988). Automatic and attentional processing: an event-related brain potential analysis of semantic priming. Brain and Language, 35, 66–85.
Holcomb, P. J. (1993). Semantic priming and stimulus degradation: Implications for the role of the N400 in language processing. Psychophysiology, 30, 47-61.
Holcomb, P. J., Grainger, J., & O’Rourke, T. (2002). An electrophysiological study of the effects of orthographic neighborhood size on printed word perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 938-950.
Hutchison, K. A. (2003). Is semantic priming due to association strength or feature overlap? A microanalytic review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10(4), 785–813.
Kiefer, M. (2002). The N400 is modulated by unconsciously perceived masked words: Further evidence for an automatic spreading activation account of N400 priming effects. Cognitive Brain Research, 13, 27–39.
Klein, D. E., & Murphy, G. L. (2001). The representation of polysemous words. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 259–282.
Klepousniotou, E., Titone, D., & Romero, C. (2008). Making sense of word senses: The comprehension of polysemy depends on sense overlap. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(6), 1534-1543
Koivisto, M. (1997). Time course of semantic activation in the cerebral hemispheres. Neuropsychologia, 35, 497–504.
Koivisto, M. (1998). Categorical priming in the cerebral hemispheres: automatic in the left hemisphere, postlexical in the right hemisphere? Neuropsychologia, 36, 661–668.
Koivisto, M., & Laine, M. (2000). Hemispheric asymmetries in activation and integration of categorical information. Laterality, 5, 1–21.
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2000). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(12), 463–470.
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207, 203–205.
Lee, C. L. & Federmeier, K. D. (2006). To mind the mind: An event-related potential study of word class and semantic ambiguity. Brain Research, 1081,191-202.
Lyons, J.(1977). Semantics.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Masson M. E. J. (1995). A distributed memory model of semantic priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 3–23.
McKeown, M. G. (1985). The acquisition of word meaning from context by children of high and low ability. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 482-496.
McRae, K., Cree, G. S., Seidenberg, M. S., & McNorgan, C. (2005). Semantic feature production norms for a large set of living and non living things. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 547–559.
Meyer, D. E., & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1971). Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90, 227–234.
Meyer, D. E., & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1976). Meaning, memory structure, and mental processes. Science, 192, 27–33.
Misra, M. & Holcomb, P. J. (2003). Event-related potential indices of masked repetition priming. Psychophysiology. 40(1): 115-30.
Moss, H., Ostrin, R. K., Tyler, L. K., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (1995). Accessing different types of lexical semantic information: evidence from priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 863–883.
Nakagawa, A. (1991). Role of anterior and posterior attention networks in hemispheric asymmetries during lexical decisions. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 3, 313–321.
Nation, K., & Snowling, M. J. (1998). Semantic processing and the development of word-recognition skills: Evidence from children with reading comprehension difficulties. Journal of Memory and Language, 39 , 85 101.
Nation, K., & Snowling, M. J. (1999). Developmental differences in sensitivity to semantic relations among good and poor comprehenders: Evidence from semantic priming. Cognition 70, B1-B13.
Nation, K., Snowling, M. J., & Clarke, P. (2007). Dissecting the relationship between language skills and learning to read: Semantic and phonological contributions to new vocabulary learning in children with poor reading comprehension. Advances in Speech-Language Pathology, 9, 131-139.
Neely, J. H. (1977). Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory: roles of inhibitionless spreading activation and limited-capacity attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 106, 226–254.
Neely, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In: D. Besner & G. W. Humphreys (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Visual word recognition (pp. 264–336). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Neely, J. H., & Keefe, D. E. (1989). Semantic context effects on visual word processing: A hybrid prospective/retrospective processing theory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 24, pp. 207–248). New York: Academic Press.
Neely, J. H., Keefe, D. E., & Ross, K. (1989). Semantic priming in the lexical decision task: Roles of prospective prime-generated expectancies and retrospective semantic matching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 15, 1003–1019.
Onifer, W., & Swinney, D. A. (1981). Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency, meaning, and contextual bias. Memory and Cognition, 9, 225–236.
Posner, M., & Snyder, C. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition : The Loyola symposium (pp. 55–185). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rayner, K., & Frazier, L. (1989). Selection mechanisms in reading lexically ambiguous words. Journal of Experiment Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 15, 779–790.
Rayner, K., Pacht , J. M., & Duffy, S. A. (1994). Effects of prior encounter and global discourse bias on the processing of lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye fixations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33(4), 527–544.
Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ricketts, J., Bishop, D. V., & Nation, K. (2008). Investigating orthographic and semantic aspects of word learning in poor comprehenders. Journal of Research in Reading, 31, 117-135.
Rodd, J., Gaskell, G., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2002). Making sense of semantic ambiguity: Semantic competition in lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 245–266.
Seidenberg, M. S., Tanenhaus, M. K., Leiman, J. M., & Bienkowski, M. (1982). Automatic access of the meanings of ambiguous words in context: Some limitations of knowledge-based processing. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 489–537.
Sereno, S. C., O′Donnell, P. J., & Rayner, K. (2006). Eye movements and lexical ambiguity resolution: Investigating the subordinate-bias effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 335–350.
Sidtis, J. J. (1985). Bilateral language and commissurotomy: Interactions between the hemispheres with and without the corpus callosum. In A. Reeves (Ed.), Epilepsy and the corpus callosum (pp. 369–380). New York: Plenum.
Silva-Pereyra, J., Harmony, T., Villanueva, G., Fernández, T., Rodríguez, M., Galán, L., & Reyes, A. (1999). N400 and lexical decisions: automatic or controlled processing? Clinical Neurophysiology, 110, 813–824.
Simpson G. B, & Burgess C. (1985). Activation and selection processes in the recognition of ambiguous words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 28–39.
Smith, E. R., Chenery, H. J., Angwin, A. J., & Copland, D. A. (2009). Hemispheric contributions to semantic activation: A divided visual field and event-related potential investigation of time-course. Brain Research, 1284, 125–144.
Swinney, D. A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)Consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 645–659.
Tanenhaus, M. K., Leiman, J. M., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1979). Evidence for multiple stages in the processing of ambiguous words in syntactic contexts. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 427–440.
指導教授 柯華葳(Haw-wei Ko) 審核日期 2014-7-29
推文 facebook   plurk   twitter   funp   google   live   udn   HD   myshare   reddit   netvibes   friend   youpush   delicious   baidu   
網路書籤 Google bookmarks   del.icio.us   hemidemi   myshare   

若有論文相關問題,請聯絡國立中央大學圖書館推廣服務組 TEL:(03)422-7151轉57407,或E-mail聯絡  - 隱私權政策聲明