Abstract
Prior experiments have shown that sentences such as (1) Mary bakes bread but no cookies lead to a reduced accessibility of the concept mentioned in the negated phrase, whereas sentences such as (2) Elizabeth burns the letters but not the photographs do not. In the present article, two explanations for this result are investigated. According to situation model theory (Johnson-Laird, 1983; van Dijk & Kintsch, 1983), the reason is that the entity mentioned within the negated phrase in (2) is not absent from the described situation. According to discourse representation theory (Kamp, 1981), in contrast, the negation operator in (2) does not reduce the accessibility of the negated concept, because the corresponding discourse referent is not introduced but merely referred to within the operator’s scope. In two experiments, participants were presented with narrative texts including negation sentences that either introduced or referred to entities, and that either described a situation in which only the nonnegated or only the negated entity was present. The accessibility of the relevant concepts was measured by means of a probe recognition task. The results support the situation models explanation.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, A., Garrod, S. C. &Sanford, A. J. (1983). The accessibility of pronominal antecedents as a function of episode shifts in narrative text.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,35A, 427–440.
Carpenter, P. A. &Just, M. A. (1975). Sentence comprehension: A psycholinguistic processing model of verification.Psychological Review,82, 45–73.
Carreiras, M., Carriedo, N., Alonso, M. A. &Fernández, A. (1997). The role of verb tense and verb aspect in the foregrounding of information during reading.Memory & Cognition,25, 438–446.
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1997). Two decades of structure building.Discourse Processes,23, 265–304.
Glenberg, A. M., Meyer, M. &Lindem, K. (1987). Mental models contribute to foregrounding during text comprehension.Journal of Memory & Language,26, 69–83.
Glenberg, A. M., Robertson, D. A., Jansen, J. L. &Johnson-Glenberg, M. C. (1999). Not propositions.Journal of Cognitive Systems Research,1, 19–33.
Heim, I. R. (1982).The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts.
Horn, L. R. (1989).A natural history of negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983).Mental models. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kamp, H. (1981). A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen, & M. Stokhof (Eds),Formal methods in the study of language (Pt. 1, pp. 277–322). Amsterdam: Mathematisch Centrum.
Kamp, H. &Reyle, U. (1993).From discourse to logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Kaup, B. (1997). The processing of negatives during discourse comprehension. In M. G. Shafto, & P. Langley (Eds.),Proceedings of the Nineteenth Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 370–375). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
MacDonald, M. C. &Just, M. A. (1989). Changes in activation levels with negation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 633–642.
McKoon, G. &Ratcliff, R.] (1992). Inference during reading.Psychological Review,99, 440–466.
Moxey, L. M. &Sanford, A. J. (1987). Quantifiers and focus.Journal of Semantics,5, 189–206.
Paterson, K. B., Sanford, A. J., Moxey, L. M. &Dawydiak, E. (1998). Quantifier polarity and referential focus during reading.Journal of Memory & Language,39, 290–306.
Reichle, E. D., Carpenter, P. A. &Just, M. A. (2000). The neural bases of strategy and skill in sentence-picture verification.Cognitive Psychology,40, 261–295.
Sanford, A. J. &Garrod, S. C. (1998). The role of scenario mapping in text comprehension.Discourse Processes,26, 159–190.
Sanford, A. J. &Moxey, L. M. &Paterson, K. B. (1996). Attentional focusing with quantifiers in production and comprehension.Memory & Cognition,24, 144–155.
van der Sandt, R. (1992). Presupposition projection as anaphora resolution.Journal of Semantics,9, 333–377.
van Dijk, T. A. &Kintsch, W. (1983).Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
Wiley, J., Mason, R. A. &Myers, J. L. (2001). Accessibility of potential referents following categorical anaphors.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,27, 1239–1249.
Zwaan, R. A., Madden, C. J. &Whitten, S. N. (2000). The presence of an event in the narrated situation affects its availability to the comprehender.Memory & Cognition,28, 1022–1028.
Zwaan, R. A. &Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory.Psychological Bulletin,123, 162–185.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This paper is based on my dissertation, which was conducted with support by the German Research Foundation (DFG) at the Graduate Program in Cognitive Science of Hamburg University.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kaup, B. Negation and its impact on the accessibility of text information. Memory & Cognition 29, 960–967 (2001). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195758
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195758