Measuring information demand of a dynamic in-vehicle display while driving – A study evaluating the MARS (Masking Action Relevant Stimuli) method

The MARS (Masking Action Relevant Stimuli) method assesses information demand for dynamic stimuli while driving. An action relevant stimulus is masked and the driver presses a button to unmask the stimulus for a limited period. We interpreted button presses as information demand. Following our previous research (Rittger, Kiesel, Schmidt, & Maag, 2014), the current study further evaluates the method. We applied the MARS method to a dynamic in-vehicle display containing recommendations from a traffic light assistant. In a driving simulator, drivers approached intersections with different traffic light phasing. The display either presented simple or complex information. In half of the drives, the participants used the MARS method. The study had a full within subjects design and fixations were recorded in all conditions. The results showed that the information demand varied according to the information in the display and the traffic light phase. A comparison of button presses with fixations showed that one unmasking interval came along with one fixation on the display. As a conclusion, the MARS method can distinguish between conditions with high and low information demand for the display. Button presses relate to fixations on the display. Hence, the MARS method is a promising tool to assess the information demand in dynamic environments and can be applied as an extension or alternative for eye tracking.     

Decomposing the relationship between cognitive functioning and self-referent memory beliefs in older adulthood: what’s memory got to do with it?

With advancing age, episodic memory performance shows marked declines along with concurrent reports of lower subjective memory beliefs. Given that normative age-related declines in episodic memory co-occur with declines in other cognitive domains, we examined the relationship between memory beliefs and multiple domains of cognitive functioning. Confirmatory bi-factor structural equation models were used to parse the shared and independent variance among factors representing episodic memory, psychomotor speed, and executive reasoning in one large cohort study (Senior Odyssey, N = 462), and replicated using another large cohort of healthy older adults (ACTIVE, N = 2802). Accounting for a general fluid cognitive functioning factor (comprised of the shared variance among measures of episodic memory, speed, and reasoning) attenuated the relationship between objective memory performance and subjective memory beliefs in both samples. Moreover, the general cognitive functioning factor was the strongest predictor of memory beliefs in both samples. These findings are consistent with the notion that dispositional memory beliefs may reflect perceptions of cognition more broadly. This may be one reason why memory beliefs have broad predictive validity for interventions that target fluid cognitive ability.     

Why reread? Evidence from garden-path and local coherence structures

Two eye-tracking experiments were conducted to compare the online reading and offline comprehension of main verb/reduced relative garden-path sentences and local coherence sentences. Rereading of early material in garden-path reduced relatives should be revisionary, aimed at reanalysing an earlier misparse; however, rereading of early material in a local coherence reduced relative need only be confirmatory, as the original parse of the earlier portion of these sentences is ultimately correct. Results of online and offline measures showed that local coherence structures elicited signals of reading disruption that arose earlier and lasted longer, and local coherence comprehension was also better than garden path comprehension. Few rereading measures in either sentence type were predicted by structural features of these sentences, nor was rereading related to comprehension accuracy, which was extremely low overall. Results are discussed with respect to selective reanalysis and good-enough processing.     

Does translation involve structural priming?

When asked to translate utterances, people might merely make sure that their translations have the same meaning as the source, but they might also maintain aspects of sentence form across languages. We report two experiments in which English–German and German–English bilinguals (without specialist translator training) repeated German ditransitive sentences whose meaning was compatible with more than one grammatical form or translated them into English. Participants almost invariably repeated the sentences accurately, thereby retaining the grammatical structure. Importantly, Experiment 1 found that they tended to repeat grammatical form across languages. Experiment 2 included a condition with sentences that had no grammatical equivalent form in English; here participants tended to persist in the order of thematic roles. We argue that cross-linguistic structural priming plays a major role in the act of translation.