바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

논문 상세

이전
논문 투고

Vol.31 No.3

Citation Share

복합 명사구의 의미 이해에서 단어 간 공백 효과의 개인차

Individual Differences in Reading Spaced and Unspaced Compound Noun Phrases

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물 / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2019, v.31 no.3, pp.253-264
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2019.31.3.006
배성봉 (영남대학교)
이광오 (영남대학교)
배성봉, & 이광오. (2019). 복합 명사구의 의미 이해에서 단어 간 공백 효과의 개인차. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 31(3), 253-264, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2019.31.3.006

초록

단어 간 공백이 문장이나 복합어의 읽기 수행을 향상시키는 현상을 공백 효과라 한다. 본 연구는 공백 효과에 미치는 개인의 어휘 지식의 영향을 조사하기 위해 실험을 실시하였다. 실험참가자 개개인의 어휘 지식은 형태소 지식, 외래어 철자 판단, 한자어 철자 판단, 받아쓰기, 저자 인식 등의 검사를 이용하여 평가하였으며, 주성분 분석을 통하여 전반적 읽기 유창성 요인(PC1)과 철자-의미 요인(PC2)이라는 두 개의 주성분을 검출하였다. 실험 자극으로 5-6개의 명사로 이루어진 실제 또는 유사 복합 명사구를 제시하고 의미성을 판단하게 하였다. 의미성 판단 시간과 오류를 선형 혼합 효과 모형으로 분석한 결과, 공백 효과의 크기에 개인차가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 실제 복합 명사구에 대한 반응에서 의미 우세 독자(=PC2 점수가 낮은 독자)는 전형적 공백 효과를 보인 반면, 철자 우세 독자(=PC2 점수가 높은 독자)는 아주 작은 공백 효과를 보였다. 유사 복합 명사구에 대한 반응에서는 PC1과 PC2가 모두 공백 유무 요인과 상호작용을 나타내어 공백 효과가 개인의 어휘 지식에 의해 영향을 받는 것이 확인되었다. 실험 결과를 바탕으로 어휘 지식의 개인차가 한글 복합 명사구의 분리와 이해에 미치는 영향에 대해 고찰하였다.

keywords
inter-word spacing, compound noun phrase, individual difference, lexical quality, 단어 간 공백, 복합 명사구, 어휘 품질, 개인차, 한글

Abstract

An experiment was conducted to investigate individual differences in reading compound noun phrases composed of 5 or 6 nouns with or without inter-word spaces. Participants were assessed on morphological knowledge, spelling recognition, dictation, and author recognition. A principal component analysis for the test scores revealed two principal components: PC1 for overall reading proficiency, and PC2 for spelling-meaning profile. During the experimental session, participants were asked to judge whether compound phrases on the screen had a plausible meaning or not. The results showed clear individual differences in inter-word spacing effects. For real compound phrases, participants with a lower PC2 score showed larger inter-word spacing effects compared with participants with a higher PC2 score. For pseudo-compound phrases, significant interactions between inter-word spacing and PC1 as well as PC2 were also found, suggesting that individual variations in lexical qualities modulated the inter-word spacing effects.

keywords
inter-word spacing, compound noun phrase, individual difference, lexical quality, 단어 간 공백, 복합 명사구, 어휘 품질, 개인차, 한글

참고문헌

1.

Andrews, S., & Lo, S. (2012). Not all skilled readers have cracked the code: Individual differences in masked form priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, Advance online publication, doi: 10.1037/a0024953

2.

Andrews, S., & Lo, S. (2013). Is morphological priming stronger for transparent than opaque words? It depends on individual differences in spelling and vocabulary. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 279-296.

3.

Andrews, S., Lo, S., & Xia, V. (2017). Individual differences in automatic semantic priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43, 1025-1039.

4.

Bae, S., Yi, K., & Masuda, H. (2016). Morphological processing within the learning of new words: A study on individual differences. The Korean Journal of Cognitive Science. 27(2), 159-180.

5.

Bae, S., & Lee, D. (2017). Individual differences in the morphological decomposition of Hanja words. The Korean Journal of Educational Psychology. 29(4), 455-462.

6.

Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., Walker, S., Christensen, R. H. B., & Singmann, H. (2015). Ime4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4, 2014. R Package Version, 1(4).

7.

Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge University Press.

8.

Burt, J. S. (2006). What is orthographic processing skill and how does it relate to word identification in reading? Journal of Research in Reading, 29(4), 400-417.

9.

Choi, D. (2009). Glocalism and Language Policy. The Journal of the Humanities, 57, 181-200.

10.

Epelboim, J., Booth, J. R., Ashkenazy, R., Taleghani, A., & Steinman, R. M. (1997). Fillers and spaces in text: The importance of word recognition during reading. Vision Research, 37(20), 2899-2914.

11.

Hong, C. (2007). The Sejong Electronic Dictionary. (Retrieved from www.ithub.korean.go.kr)

12.

Inhoff, A. W., Radach, R., & Heller, D. (2000). Complex compounds in German: Interword spaces facilitate segmentation but hinder assignment of meaning. Journal of Memory and Language, 42(1), 23-50.

13.

Juhasz, B. J., Inhoff, A. W., & Rayner, K. (2005). The role of interword spaces in the processing of English compound words. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 291-316.

14.

Lee, H., Seong, E., Choi, W., & Lowder, M. W. (2018). Development and assessment of the Korean Author Recognition Test. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1747021818814461.

15.

McGowan, V. A., White, S. J., Jordan, T. R., & Paterson, K. B. (2014). Aging and the use of interword spaces during reading: Evidence from eye movements. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 27(3), 740-747.

16.

Moore, M., & Gordon, P. C. (2015). Reading ability and print exposure: Item response theory analysis of the author recognition test. Behavior Research Methods, 47(4), 1095-1109.

17.

Paterson, K. B., Liversedge, S. P., Filik, R., Juhasz, B. J., White, S. J., & Rayner, K. (2007). Focus identification during sentence comprehension: Evidence from eye movements. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60(10), 1423-1445.

18.

Perea, M., Tejero, P., & Winskel, H. (2015). Can colours be used to segment words when reading? Acta Psychologica, 159, 8-13.

19.

Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 77(4), 357-383.

20.

R Core Team. (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

21.

Rayner, K., Yang, J., Schuett, S., & Slattery, T. J. (2013). Eye movements of older and younger readers when reading unspaced text. Experimental Psychology. 60(5), 354-361.

22.

Sheridan, H., Reichle, E. D., & Reingold, E. M. (2016). Why does removing inter-word spaces produce reading deficits? The role of parafoveal processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(5), 1543-1552.

23.

Spragins, A. B., Lefton, L. A., & Fisher, D. F. (1976). Eye movements while reading and searching spatially transformed text: A developmental examination. Memory & Cognition, 4, 36-42.

24.

Tan, L. C., & Yap, M. J. (2016). Are individual differences in masked repetition and semantic priming reliable? Visual Cognition, 24, 182-200.

25.

Veldre, A., Drieghe, D., & Andrews, S. (2017). Spelling ability selectively predicts the magnitude of disruption in unspaced text reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43, 1612-1628.

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물

논문 투고 OA 정책