What is it about?
What strategies do language users rely on when deciding on the interpretation of non-literal language? And do we find any differences between typical individuals and individuals on the autism spectrum where the understanding of non-literal language is impaired? Can studying their eye and hand movements when listening and reading such expressions reveal those strategies? This was the main goal in the current study. Our results suggest that individuals with autism have different processing patterns than typically developing peers when interpreting figurative language, even when they provide the correct answers. Both children with and without autism, and participants with autism display greater uncertainty and competition between alternatives when providing the answer, and often also consider the literal interpretation of the expression against its intended non-literal meaning. We provide evidence that expression transparency and de-composability play a central role in figurative language processing across all groups, and that sometimes even transparent expressions can pose a difficulty in comprehension, especially for the participants with autism and for younger typical participants.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
This is the first study to simultaneously collect evidence from both gaze- and hand-behaviour in a task involving non-literal language, comparing two age groups of participants, from two population samples. We provide evidence that participants would first inspect a number of options with their eyes, before making a motor decision with the mouse. Furthermore, there is little overlap in the alternatives which appear relevant for the gaze inspection and for the motor decision. Finally, we show that expression transparency is not always an advantage in non-literal language comprehension. For a theoretical discussion see also Vulchanova et al. (2019) https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10849-019-09282-7
Perspectives
We hope this article makes an important novel contribution to the study of non-literal language and the underlying strategies that language users resort to. The article adds to the still understudied field of figurative language processing in children using eye-tracking methodology. An interesting additional perspective is that providing the correct answer does not always reflect using the same underlying strategy.
Professor Mila Vulchanova
Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Gaze and Motor Traces of Language Processing: Evidence from Autism Spectrum Disorders in Comparison to Typical Controls, Cognitive Neuropsychology, August 2019, Taylor & Francis,
DOI: 10.1080/02643294.2019.1652155.
You can read the full text:
Resources
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
