Group items tagged

An excellent guide to how to evaluate a website.

"A small research arm of the U.S. government's intelligence establishment wants to understand how speakers of Farsi, Russian, English, and Spanish see the world by building software that automatically evaluates their use of metaphors."

"What happens when speakers try to "dodge" a question they would rather not answer by answering a different question? In 4 studies, we show that listeners can fail to detect dodges when speakers answer similar-but objectively incorrect-questions (the "artful dodge"), a detection failure that goes hand-in-hand with a failure to rate dodgers more negatively. We propose that dodges go undetected because listeners' attention is not usually directed toward a goal of dodge detection (i.e., Is this person answering the question?) but rather toward a goal of social evaluation (i.e., Do I like this person?). "

Article talks about the growing field of forensic linguistics: that is, the study of language to identify who said or wrote that verbal sample. Applications are enormous, from evaluating the identity of potential asylum seekers to pinpointing the Unabomber or perpetrators of crimes where language data is involved, but critics maintain that computer scans alone to evaluate language are insufficient and that overreliance can pose dangers.

This article talks about a study that was conducted by MIT linguistics professors and a group from Carleton University that explored the phenomenon of why children mix up the words "and" and "or." Linguists say that children use almost entirely the same approach as adults when it comes to evaluating potentially ambiguous sentences, by testing and "strengthening" them into sentences with more precise meanings, when disjunction and conjunction ("or" and "and") are involved. However, they found that children do not test how a sentence would change if "and" was directly substituted for "or." On the other hand, adults compute "scalar implicatures," which is a technical phrase for thinking about the implications of the logical relationship between a sentence and its alternative. The research team conducted the study's experiment by testing 59 English-speaking children and 26 adults. The children ranged in age from 4 months to 6 years. The linguists gave the subjects a series of statements along with pictures, and asked them to say whether the statements were true or false. The results suggest that children are computing scalar implicatures when they evaluate the statements, but they largely do not substitute disjunctions and conjunctions when testing out the possible meaning of sentences, as adults do. In general, the researchers observed, across languages, and for children and adults alike, when you take 'and' out of the space of alternatives, "or" becomes "and."

How TV shows, more specifically Peppa Pig, affect language development in young children. This study looked at the language lexicons within episodes and evaluated whether or not it was appropriate for young language learners.

How do animals communicate with each other? A look at the Lana project, Washoe, a comparison with human communication and evaluation of research.

Foreign language programs are often one of the first items to be scrutinized and cut when elementary, middle, and high schools in the U.S. face poor performance evaluations or budget crunches. However, many studies have demonstrated the benefits of second language learning not only on student's linguistic abilities but on their cognitive and creative abilities as well.

This NYT article reports findings of a recently released study, which concluded that computers are capable of scoring essays on standardized tests as well, or possibly better, than humans. However, Les Perelman, a director of writing at MIT and a tester of the Educational Testing Services E-Rater program disagrees, arguing that the system can be easily "gamed".

"School-age children whose mothers nurtured them early in life have brains with a larger hippocampus ... For the current study, the researchers conducted brain scans on 92 of the children who had had symptoms of depression or were mentally healthy when they were studied as preschoolers. The imaging revealed that children without depression who had been nurtured had a hippocampus almost 10 percent larger than children whose mothers were not as nurturing. ... Although 95 percent of the parents whose nurturing skills were evaluated during the earlier study were biological mothers, the researchers say that the effects of nurturing on the brain are likely to be the same for any primary caregiver - whether they are fathers, grandparents or adoptive parents."

One significant concern that pilots have about cockpit auditory warnings is that the signals presently used lack a sense of priority. The relationship between auditory warning sound parameters and perceived urgency is, therefore, an important topic of enquiry in aviation psychology. The present investigation examined the relationship among subjective assessments of urgency, reaction time, and brainwave activity with three auditory warning signals. Subjects performed a tracking task involving automated and manual conditions, and were presented with auditory warnings having various levels of perceived and situational urgency. Subjective assessments revealed that subjects were able to rank warnings on an urgency scale, but rankings were altered after warnings were mapped to a situational urgency scale. Reaction times differed between automated and manual tracking task conditions, and physiological data showed attentional differences in response to perceived and situational warning urgency levels. This study shows that the use of physiological measures sensitive to attention and arousal, in conjunction with behavioural and subjective measures, may lead to the design of auditory warnings that produce a sense of urgency in an operator that matches the urgency of the situation.

The shift from print to digital reading may lead to more than changes in speed and physical processing. It may come at a cost to understanding, analyzing, and evaluating a text. However, research suggests that people can deeply read using digital media: what's needed is self-monitoring, focus, and use of strategies such as annotation, either the old-fashioned way, or digitally. Digital devices in and of themselves may not disrupt the fuller synthesis of deep reading. What does: multitasking on the Internet and distractions caused by hyperlinks. Indeed, some data suggest that, in certain environments and on certain types of tasks, we can read equally well in any format.

Infants can make sense of complex social situations, taking into account who knows what about whom, according to research published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science. "Our findings show that 13-month-olds can make sense of social situations using their understanding about others' minds and social evaluation skills," says psychological scientists and study authors You-jung Choi and Yuyan Luo of the University of Missouri.

In the good old days, dating was defined by a series of face-to-face encounters. People met, they spent time in each other's company, they got to know each other's friends and family, and they evaluated the quality of their connection and compatibility in person...

This seminal longitudinal study, conducted by Goodwyn, Acredolo and Brown (2000), evaluated the benefits of purposefully encouraging hearing infants to use simple gestures as symbols for objects, requests, and conditions. Researchers measured the receptive and expressive language abilities of 103 babies via standardized language tests at the age of 11, 15, 19, 24, 30, and 36 months. Their findings suggest that symbolic gesturing does not hamper children's early verbal development, and may even facilitate it. The possible reasons underlying the results: increases in infant-directed speech, infant-selected topic selection, and scaffolding that encourages communication.

In this study, we address the communication technologies individuals within romantic relationships are using to communicate with one another, the frequency of use, and the association between the use of these technologies and couple's positive and negative communication.Participants consisted of individuals involved in a serious, committed, heterosexual relationship. The Relationship Evaluation Questionnaire instrument was used to assess a variety of relationship variables. The majority of individuals within the study frequently used cell phones and text messaging to communicate with their partner, with ' ' expressing affection ' ' being the most common reason for contact. Younger individuals reported using all forms of media (except for e-mail) more frequently than older participants. Relationship satisfaction did not predict specific use of media but predicted several reasons for media use. Additional analyses revealed that text messaging had the strongest association with individuals ' positive and negative communication within their relationships. Specifically, text messaging to express affection, broach potentially confrontational subjects, and to hurt partners were associated with individuals' view of positive and negative communication within their relationship. Implications of the results are discussed.

According to the CDC autism spectrum disorder affects 1 in 150 children. The Language Use Inventory (LUI) is a questionnaire for parents about their child's language use in various settings. It focuses on pragmatic language development in everyday interactions. This will help doctors understand ways of identifying language skills in autistic children.

Jennifer Sclafani, Georgetown University linguist, examines the idiolect of Trump. Everyone possesses an idiolect: an idiosyncratic form of language that is unique to an individual. Trump's idiolect seems particularly polarizing. Critics might decry Trump thusly: "He doesn't make any sense." "He uses a lot of small words." "His speeches are non-substantive." On the other hand, supporters see Trump as "authentic," "relatable," and "consistent." He's a "straight shooter" who "doesn't mince words." So how does one idiolect produce such polarizing evaluations? It has to do with the precarious connections between linguistic form and meaning. The relationship between the two, as the anthropologist Elinor Ochs describes, is non-exclusive, indirect, and constitutive. Put simply, there are multiple meanings associated with any given linguistic feature, and the connection between form and meaning is a two-way street Whichever meaning is activated by a specific pronunciation, or any other aspect of your idiolect, has everything to do with context: Where are you? Who is your audience? What is your purpose? What image are you trying to project? These are factors that candidates are always taking into account as they put forth their presidential selves on the campaign trail. Tailoring their speech to the context, like when a candidate takes on a drawl while campaigning in the South, has been grounds for being labeled "inconsistent" or "fake," as we've seen with Hillary Clinton, even though this type of linguistic accommodation is a perfectly natural feature of everyone's idiolect.

This article describes a study conducted by the Allen Institute of Artificial Intelligence which evaluated AI's capability to actually understand the language it produces. This comes after recent advancements in natural-language processing (NLP) have allowed AI to generate convincing literary works. In the study, researchers posed over 44,000 questions, built off the Winograd Schema Challenge, to an AI system. Essentially, the questions used pairs of sentences with slight differences that flipped the meaning of a pronoun, thus requiring a comprehensive understanding of semantics in order to correctly assign the pronoun. The study found that the AI only had a 60-80% success rate, compared to the human success rate of roughly 94%.