Integration of Verbal and Visual Information as Evidenced by Distortions in Picture Memory

Gentner, Dedre; Loftus, Elizabeth F.

doi:10.2307/1421930

Cited by 40 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results extend previous work on the role of language in eye-witness memory (e.g., Gentner & Loftus, 1979;Loftus & Palmer, 1974) to the cross-linguistic domain. In this case, typical ways of talking in one's linguistic community predict patterns in people's eye-witness memory for who did what.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…If events would normally be described less agentively in your linguistic community, would you be less likely to pay attention to and remember the agents of those events than if they were normally described more agentively? Previous work has examined the role of linguistic framing in eyewitness memory within a language by presenting participants with different descriptions of the same event, for example varying the vividness of verbs, and measuring effects on memory (e.g., Gentner & Loftus, 1979;Loftus & Palmer, 1974).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a typical within-language framing study (e.g., Gentner & Loftus, 1979;Loftus & Palmer, 1974), the experimenter provides participants with a onetime linguistic framing of a single event and tests if the description influences how people remember that specific event. This type of study demonstrates that explicit linguistic framing can have immediate and specific effects on memory.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Who dunnit? Cross-linguistic differences in eye-witness memory

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does eye-witness memory differ depending on the language one speaks? We examined English and Spanish speakers' descriptions of intentional and accidental events, and their memory for the agents of these events. English and Spanish speakers described intentional events similarly, using mostly agentive language (e.g., "She broke the vase"). However, when it came to accidental events English speakers used more agentive language than did Spanish speakers. Results from a non-linguistic memory task mirrored the patterns in language. English and Spanish speakers remembered the agents of intentional events equally well. However, English speakers remembered the agents of accidental events better than did Spanish speakers. Together these findings demonstrate that there are cross-linguistic differences in event descriptions that have important consequences for eye-witness memory.Keywords Language . Language and thought . Eye-witness memory . Events . Causality . Agents . AccidentAre there cross-linguistic differences in eye-witness memory? Can patterns in our linguistic environment influence what we remember about the events we witness? In this paper we identify a cross-linguistic difference in how English and Spanish speakers describe the same events, and find that there is a corresponding cross-linguistic difference in eye-witness memory.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Who dunnit? Cross-linguistic differences in eye-witness memory

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers have demonstrated the role of language in the perception of time (Boroditsky, 2000(Boroditsky, , 2001, colour (Thierry et al, 2009;Winawer et al, 2007), spatial cognition (Bowerman, Choi, McDonough, & Mandler, 1999;Gentner & Loftus, 1979;Landau & Jackendoff, 1993;Levinson, Kita, Haun, & Rasch, 2002;McDonough, Choi, & Mandler, 2003), the perception of motion (Athanasopoulos et al, 2015;Czechowska & Ewert, 2011), attention and information processing styles (Rhode, Voyer, & Gleibs, 2016), the perception and memory of events (Boroditsky, Ham, & Ramscar, 2002;Fausey & Boroditsky, 2010;Loftus & Palmer, 1974;Scholl & Nakayama, 2002), and even constructing agency, including attending to and remembering the agents of events (Choi, 2009;Fausey & Boroditsky, 2010a;Fausey & Boroditsky, 2011;Fausey, Long, Inamori, & Boroditsky, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Grammatical Gender Influence Perception? A Study of Polish and French Speakers

Haertlé

2017

Psychology of Language and Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Can the perception of a word be influenced by its grammatical gender? Can it happen that speakers of one language perceive an object to have masculine features, while speakers of another language perceive the same object to have feminine features? Previous studies suggest that this is the case, and also that there is some supra-language gender categorisation of objects as natural/feminine and artefact/masculine. This study was an attempt to replicate these findings on another population of subjects. This is the first Polish study of this kind, comparing the perceptions of objects by Polish-and French-speaking individuals. The results of this study show that grammatical gender may cue people to assess objects as masculine or feminine. However, the findings of some previous studies, that feminine features are more often ascribed to natural objects than artifacts, were not replicated.

show abstract

“…For example, Billman and Krych (1998) found that hearing path verbs (e.g., enter) or manner verbs (e.g., walk) while watching videotaped motion events influenced English-speaking subjects' subsequent recognition of variants of the events: They were more likely to notice a change in manner if they had heard a manner verb, and likewise for path. Gentner and Loftus (1979) found that performance on a picture recognition task was influenced by having matched the picture to a verb 1 week prior to the recognition test. Participants who had matched a specific verb (e.g., hiking) to a general picture (a woman walking) were highly likely to choose the specific picture (a woman hiking) over the general picture they had actually received.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial language influences memory for spatial scenes

Feist

Gentner

2007

Memory & Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does language influence recognition for spatial scenes? In Experiments 1 and 2, participants viewed ambiguous pictures, with or without spatial sentences. In a yes-no recognition task, only the spatial sentences group made more false alarms toward the center of the spatial category than in the other direction; three other comparison groups showed no such tendency. This shift toward the core of the semantic category suggests that spatial language interacted with perceptual information during encoding. In Experiment 3, we varied the materials to test the interactive encoding account against a separate encoding account in which separately stored sentences are accessed during picture recognition. The results support the interactive encoding account in which spatial language influences the encoding and memory of spatial relations. Memory & Cognition 2007, 35 (2), 283-296 M. I. Feist, feist@louisiana.edu

show abstract

Integration of Verbal and Visual Information as Evidenced by Distortions in Picture Memory

Cited by 40 publications

References 25 publications

Who dunnit? Cross-linguistic differences in eye-witness memory

Who dunnit? Cross-linguistic differences in eye-witness memory

Does Grammatical Gender Influence Perception? A Study of Polish and French Speakers

Spatial language influences memory for spatial scenes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About