title: Enhancement and suppression effects resulting from information structuring in sentences.
abstract: Information structuring through the use of cleft sentences increases the processing efficiency of references to elements within the scope of focus. Furthermore, there is evidence that putting certain types of emphasis on individual words not only enhances their subsequent processing, but also protects these words from becoming suppressed in the wake of subsequent information, suggesting mechanisms of enhancement and suppression. In Experiment 1, we showed that clefted constructions facilitate the integration of subsequent sentences that make reference to elements within the scope of focus, and that they decrease the efficiency with reference to elements outside of the scope of focus. In Experiment 2, using an auditory text-change-detection paradigm, we showed that focus has similar effects on the strength of memory representations. These results add to the evidence for enhancement and suppression as mechanisms of sentence processing and clarify that the effects occur within sentences having a marked focus structure.
authors.affiliation: University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland. alison.sanford@strath.ac.uk
authors.forename: Alison J S
authors.initials: AJ
authors.lastname: Sanford
authors.forename: Jessica
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Price
authors.forename: Anthony J
authors.initials: AJ
authors.lastname: Sanford
mesh_terms: D001288:Attention; D032882:Comprehension; D006801:Humans; D011939:Mental Recall; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D011578:Psycholinguistics; D011930:Reaction Time; D011932:Reading; D012660:Semantics; D013018:Sound Spectrography; D013061:Speech Acoustics; D013067:Speech Perception
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 1995 May;23(3):313-23
references.pmid: 7791600
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2002 Sep 1;6(9):382
references.pmid: 12200180
references.citation: Cogn Psychol. 2006 Sep;53(2):146-93
references.pmid: 16797524
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1992 Mar;18(2):266-83
references.pmid: 1532820
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 1997 Sep;25(5):653-60
references.pmid: 9337583
references.citation: Cogn Psychol. 1995 Aug;29(1):24-58
references.pmid: 7641525
references.citation: Cognition. 1979 Mar;7(1):49-59
references.pmid: 436402
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2004 Oct;11(5):882-8
references.pmid: 15732698
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 1997 Oct;1(7):261-7
references.pmid: 21223921
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1999 Oct;106(4):748-65
references.pmid: 10560327
references.citation: Cognition. 1989 Jul;32(2):99-156
references.pmid: 2752708