Showing papers by "Ira A. Noveck published in 2006"

How reaction time measures elucidate the matching bias and the way negations are processed

Abstract: Matching bias refers to the non-normative performance that occurs when elements mentioned in a rule do not correspond with those in a test item (e.g., consider the double mismatch between the rule If there is a not a T on the card then there is not a 4 and a card showing H6). One aim of the present work is to capture matching bias via reaction times as participants carry out truth-table evaluation tasks. Experiment 1 requires participants to verify conditional rules, and Experiment 2 to falsify them as the paradigm (a) employs four types of conditional sentences that systematically rotate negatives in the antecedent and consequent; and (b) presents predominantly cases having true antecedents. These experiments reveal that mismatching is linked to higher rates of incorrect responses and slower evaluation times. A second aim is to investigate the way not is processed. We compare a narrow view of negations, which argues that negation only denies information (e.g., not-T only says there is no T), to a search ...

What Autism Can Reveal About Every … not Sentences

Abstract: The sentence Every horse did not jump over the fence can be interpreted with the negation taking scope over the quantifier (i.e. not every horse jumped) or with the quantifier Every taking scope over the negation (ultimately providing the reading no horse jumped). Beginning with Musolino, Crain and Thornton (2000), much work has shown that while adults typically adopt a Not every reading in ‘2-of-3’ contexts (e.g. where 2-of-3 horses jump over a fence), children do not and often produce None readings instead. In line with suggestions from Musolino and Lidz (2003, 2006), we propose that this developmental effect relies to a great extent on pragmatic capacities. In the present work, we aim to replicate Musolino et al.’s (2000) results with 4year-olds and adults while including verbally competent autistic participants. Syntactic skills among verbally competent autistic participants are assumed to be unimpaired while their pragmatic deficiencies have been well documented. Our results show an adult preference for the Not every reading in 2-of-3 contexts and equivocality among children and autistic participants. This is in line with the expectation that syntax makes the two readings equally available and that adults, unlike young children and autistic participants, are efficient at exploiting the context in order to come up with a single consistent reading.