How does meaning come to mind? Four broad principles of semantic processing.

Pexman, Penny M.

doi:10.1037/cep0000235

Cited by 19 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While socialness and semantic diversity had a facilitatory effect on RTs in both tasks, concreteness and valence contributed to the word knowledge task, but not to the LDT. This is in line with research suggesting that conceptual representations are not stable across time and contexts; instead, the aspects of a word's conceptual representation retrieved at any one point depend on the specific task/context (Pexman, 2020;Yee & Thompson-Schill, 2016). Our pattern of findings may be explained by the fact that LDT only requires the retrieval of some indication that a word has meaning, such as that indexed by its association with a multiplicity of meanings (i.e., semantic diversity).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Quantifying Social Semantics: An Inclusive Definition of Socialness and Ratings for 8,388 English Words

Diveica¹,

Pexman²,

Binney³

2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been proposed that social experience plays an important role in the grounding of concepts, and socialness has been proffered as a fundamental organisational principle underpinning semantic representation in the human brain. However, the empirical support for these hypotheses is limited by inconsistencies in the way socialness has been defined and measured. To further advance theory, the field must establish a clearer working definition, and research efforts could be facilitated by the availability of an extensive set of socialness ratings for individual concepts. Therefore, in the current work we employed a novel and inclusive definition to test the extent to which socialness is reliably perceived as a broad construct, and we report socialness norms for over 8,000 English words, including nouns, verbs and adjectives. Our inclusive socialness measure shows good reliability and validity, and our analyses suggest that the socialness ratings capture aspects of word meaning which are distinct to those measured by other pertinent semantic constructs, including concreteness and emotional valence. Finally, in a series of regression analyses, we show for the first time that the socialness of a word's meaning explains unique variance in participant performance on lexical tasks. Our dataset of socialness norms has considerable item overlap with those used both in other lexical/semantic norms and in available behavioural mega-studies. They can help target testable predictions about brain and behaviour derived from multiple representation theories and neurobiological accounts of social semantics.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Quantifying Social Semantics: An Inclusive Definition of Socialness and Ratings for 8,388 English Words

Diveica¹,

Pexman²,

Binney³

2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fourth, it is worth noting that concepts are not static and that their representation depends on ongoing task contexts as well as prior experience [113,114]. For example, it has been shown that concepts are to some degree influenced by culture and the language spoken [115,116].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Semantics: The Organisation and Grounding of Abstract Concepts

Pexman¹,

Diveica²,

Binney³

2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

concepts, like justice and friendship, are a central feature of our daily lives. Traditionally, abstract concepts are distinguished from other concepts in that they cannot be directly experienced through the senses. As such, they pose a challenge for strongly embodied models of semantic representation that assume a central role for sensorimotor information. There is growing recognition, however, that it is possible for meaning to be ‘grounded’ via cognitive systems, including those involved in processing language and emotion. In this article, we focus on the specific proposal that social significance is a key feature in the representation of some concepts. We begin by reviewing recent evidence in favour of this proposal from the fields of cognitive science and neuroimaging. We then discuss the limited extent to which there is consensus about the definition of ‘socialness’ and propose essential next steps for research in this domain. Taking one such step, we describe preliminary data from an unprecedented large-scale rating study that can help determine how socialness is distinct from other facets of word meaning. We provide a backdrop of contemporary theories regarding semantic representation and social cognition and highlight important predictions for both brain and behaviour.

show abstract

“…A third line of psycholinguistic research addresses meaning-based or semantic aspects of word and text processing, such as emotionality or embodiment, as a function of the social and interpersonal ways that people use words (Caldwell-Harris, 2015; Imbault et al, 2021; Pavlenko, 2008; Pexman, 2020). For example, when operating in an L1, most children are instructed to refrain from using taboo language from an early age, and this is indirectly reinforced by their accumulated experiences in childhood of the highly emotionally charged situations in which such words tend to be used (e.g., Harris et al, 2003).…”

Section: Psycholinguistic Approaches To Multilingual Readingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socioecological and psycholinguistic approaches to multilingual health literacy.

Hernández-Rivera¹,

Gullifer²,

Titone³

2022

Translational Issues in Psychological Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Socioecological approaches to communication consider people's language behaviors as nested within multilevel sociocultural systems. In contrast, psycholinguistic approaches consider people's language behaviors as a collection of person-specific experiences and capacities (Itzhak et al., 2017). Both approaches are relevant to understanding real-world communicative needs, such as health literacy in multilingual settings. While health literacy in a first (L1) or second language (L2) is crucial for comprehending health information, the precise determinants that influence health literacy (e.g., text characteristics, reader characteristics, and multilayered socioecological context) remain unclear, particularly for people living within language-discordant contexts (i.e., where the language of the environment differs from one's L1). To address these issues, we review health literacy as it pertains to multilingualism and emphasize the relevance of psycholinguistic studies of written language processing, individual differences in L1 and L2 reading skills, and language experience. Our goal is to synthesize information that could be useful for maximizing health literacy and reducing linguistic barriers, by expanding upon existing health literacy frameworks to the domain of multilingualism.What is the significance of this article for the general public?We review how the socioecological context of multilingualism, and the psycholinguistic behaviors of multilingual people jointly impact health literacy. We address health literacy challenges in multilingual adults, and how psycholinguistic phenomena reported for multilingual adults might address these challenges. We hope this review advances interdisciplinary efforts to characterize and overcome language barriers in health care access.

show abstract

How does meaning come to mind? Four broad principles of semantic processing.

Cited by 19 publications

References 87 publications

Quantifying Social Semantics: An Inclusive Definition of Socialness and Ratings for 8,388 English Words

Quantifying Social Semantics: An Inclusive Definition of Socialness and Ratings for 8,388 English Words

Social Semantics: The Organisation and Grounding of Abstract Concepts

Socioecological and psycholinguistic approaches to multilingual health literacy.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About