de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean
English
 
Help Guide Disclaimer Contact us Login
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Poster

Prediction and production of simple mathematical equations

MPS-Authors
http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons22880

Hintz,  Florian
Psychology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
International Max Planck Research School for Language Sciences, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;

http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons1167

Meyer,  Antje S.
Psychology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, External Organizations;

Locator
There are no locators available
Fulltext (public)

poster_hintz_meyer.pdf
(Postprint), 2MB

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

Hintz, F., & Meyer, A. S. (2013). Prediction and production of simple mathematical equations. Poster presented at the 18th Conference of the European Society for Cognitive Psychology (ESCOP 2013), Budapest, Hungary.


Cite as: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0014-4D19-F
Abstract
An important issue in current psycholinguistics is the relationship between the production and comprehension systems. It has been argued that these systems are tightly linked, and that, in particular, listeners use the speech production system to predict upcoming content. We tested this view using a novel version of the visual world paradigm. Participants heard mathematical equations and looked at a clock face showing the numbers 1 to 12. On alternating trials they either heard a complete equation (3+8=11) or they heard the first part (3+8) and had to produce the solution (11, target hereafter) themselves. Participants were encouraged to look at the relevant numbers throughout the trial. On listening trials, the participants typically looked at the target before the onset of target name, and on speaking trials they typically looked at the target before naming it. However, the timing of the looks to the targets was slightly different, with participants looking earlier at the target when they had to speak themselves than when they listened. This suggests that predicting during listening and planning to speak are indeed very similar but not identical. The further methodological and theoretical consequences of the study will be discussed.