Working Memory Mechanism in Proportional Quantifier Verification
- 284 Downloads
The paper explores the cognitive mechanisms involved in the verification of sentences with proportional quantifiers (e.g. “More than half of the dots are blue”). The first study shows that the verification of proportional sentences is more demanding than the verification of sentences such as: “There are seven blue and eight yellow dots”. The second study reveals that both types of sentences are correlated with memory storage, however, only proportional sentences are associated with the cognitive control. This result suggests that the cognitive mechanism underlying the verification of proportional quantifiers is crucially related to the integration process, in which an individual has to compare in memory the cardinalities of two sets. In the third study we find that the numerical distance between two cardinalities that must be compared significantly influences the verification time and accuracy. The results of our studies are discussed in the broader context of processing complex sentences.
KeywordsQuantifiers Computational complexity Approximate number sense Working memory Cognitive control
The work of the first author was supported by a Grant No. 2011/01/D/HS6/01920 funded by the National Science Centre in Poland. The second author would like to acknowledge a generous support of NWO Veni Grant 639.021.232.
- Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
- Chomsky, N. (1969). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Dehaene, S. (1999). The Number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. Oxford: University Press.Google Scholar
- Ebbinghaus, H. D., Flum, J., & Thomas, W. (1996). Mathematical logic. Undergraduate texts in mathematics. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Engle, R., Kane, M., & Tuholski, S. (1999). Individual differences in working memory capacity and what they tell us about controlled attention, general fluid intelligence and functions of the prefrontal cortex. In A. Miyake & P. Shah (Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 102–134). London: Cambridge Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hopcroft, J. E., Motwani, R., & Ullman, J. D. (2006). Introduction to automata theory, languages, and computation. Boston: Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co.Google Scholar
- Miller, G. A., & Chomsky, N. (1963). Finitary models of language users. In D. R. Luce, R. R. Bush, & E. Galanter (Eds.), Handbook of mathematical psychology (Vol. II). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Ristad, E. S. (1993). The Language complexity game. Artificial intelligence. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Szymanik, J. (2009). Quantifiers in TIME and SPACE. Computational complexity of generalized quantifiers in natural language. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
- Szymanik, J., & Zajenkowski, M. (2010b). Quantifiers and working memory. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 6042, 456–464.Google Scholar