The role of look-backs in the processing of written sarcasm
Previous eye-tracking studies suggest that when resolving the meaning of sarcastic utterances in a text, readers often initiate fixations that return to the sarcastic utterance from subsequent parts of the text. We used a modified trailing mask paradigm to examine both the role of these look-back fixations in sarcasm comprehension and whether there are individual differences in how readers resolve sarcasm. Sixty-two adult participants read short paragraphs containing either a literal or a sarcastic utterance while their eye movements were recorded. The texts were presented using a modified trailing mask paradigm: sentences were initially masked with a string of x’s and were revealed to the reader one at a time. In the normal reading condition, sentences remained visible on the screen when the reader moved on to the next sentence; in the masked condition, the sentences were replaced with a mask. Individual differences in working memory capacity (WMC) and the processing of emotional information were also measured. The results showed that readers adjusted their reading behavior when a mask prevented them from re-examining the text content. Interestingly, the readers’ compensatory strategies depended on spatial WMC. Moreover, the results showed that the ability to process emotional information was related to less processing effort invested in resolving sarcasm. The present study suggests that look-backs are driven by a need to re-examine the text contents but that they are not necessary for the successful comprehension of sarcasm. The strategies used to resolve sarcasm are mediated by individual differences.
KeywordsSarcasm Working memory Emotion Eye-tracking Individual differences
This research was supported by a grant from the Finnish Cultural Foundation awarded to Henri Olkoniemi. Portions of the data were reported at the 26th Annual Meeting of the Society for Text & Discourse in Kassel, Germany, in July 2016 and at the Scandinavian Workshop on Applied Eye Tracking, Turku, Finland, in June 2016.
- Amenta, S., Noël, X., Verbanck, P., & Campanella, S. (2013). Decoding emotional components in complex communicative situations (irony) and its relation to empathic abilities in male chronic alcoholics: An issue for treatment. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research, 37, 339–347. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.2012.01909.x Google Scholar
- Booth, R. W., & Weger, U. W. (2013). The function of regression in reading: Backward eye movements allow re-reading. Memory & Cognition, 41, 82–97. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-012-0244-y
- Fallows, J. (2016). Why Twitter doesn’t work with sarcasm, chap. 823. The Atlantic. Retrieved from: https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2016/01/why-twitter-doesn’t-work-with-sarcasm-chap-823/424761/.
- Fougnie, D., Zughni, S., Godwin, D., & Marois, R. (2015). Working memory storage is intrinsically domain specific. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144, 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038211
- Gernsbacher, M. A. (1993). Less skilled readers have less efficient suppression mechanism. Psychological Science, 4, 294–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00567.x Google Scholar
- Gibbs, R. W. (1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Giora, R. (2003). On our mind: Salience, context, and figurative language. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Grice, H. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Hyönä, J., Lorch, R. F., & Rinck, M. (2003). Eye movement measures to study global text processing. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind’s eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 313–334). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-044451020-4/50018-9 Google Scholar
- Joukamaa, M., Miettunen, J., Kokkonen, P., Koskinen, M., Julkunen, J., Kauhanen, J.(2001). Psychometric properties of the Finnish 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 55, 123–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/08039480116694
- Kennedy, A., Brooks, R., Flynn, L.-A., & Prophet, C. (2003). The reader’s spatial code. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind’s eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 193–212). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-044451020-4/50012-8 Google Scholar
- Mueller, S. (2012). The Psychology Experiment Building Language (Version 0.13.) [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://pebl.sourceforge.net.
- Olkoniemi, H., Strömberg, V., & Kaakinen, J.K. (in press). The ability to recognizeognise emotions predicts the time-course of sarcasm processing: Evidence from eye movements. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology.Google Scholar
- R Core Team (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org.
- Robbins, M. (2010). The war on irony (on the Twitter joke trial). The Guardian. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/nov/11/2
- Rockwell, P., & Theriot, E. M. (2001). Culture, gender, and gender mix in encoders of sarcasm: A self-assessment analysis. Communication Research Report, 18, 44–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824090109384781
- Ronson, J. (2015) How one stupid tweet blew up Justine Sacco’s life. Retrieved from: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-tweet-ruined-justine-saccos-life.html.
- Taylor, C. (2017). Women are bitchy but men are sarcastic? Investigating gender and sarcasm. Gender and Language, 11, 415–445. https://doi.org/10.1558/genl.27906