TY - JOUR A1 - Logacev, Pavel A1 - Vasishth, Shravan T1 - A Multiple-Channel Model of Task-Dependent Ambiguity Resolution in Sentence Comprehension JF - Cognitive science : a multidisciplinary journal of anthropology, artificial intelligence, education, linguistics, neuroscience, philosophy, psychology ; journal of the Cognitive Science Society N2 - Traxler, Pickering, and Clifton (1998) found that ambiguous sentences are read faster than their unambiguous counterparts. This so-called ambiguity advantage has presented a major challenge to classical theories of human sentence comprehension (parsing) because its most prominent explanation, in the form of the unrestricted race model (URM), assumes that parsing is non-deterministic. Recently, Swets, Desmet, Clifton, and Ferreira (2008) have challenged the URM. They argue that readers strategically underspecify the representation of ambiguous sentences to save time, unless disambiguation is required by task demands. When disambiguation is required, however, readers assign sentences full structure—and Swets et al. provide experimental evidence to this end. On the basis of their findings, they argue against the URM and in favor of a model of task-dependent sentence comprehension. We show through simulations that the Swets et al. data do not constitute evidence for task-dependent parsing because they can be explained by the URM. However, we provide decisive evidence from a German self-paced reading study consistent with Swets et al.'s general claim about task-dependent parsing. Specifically, we show that under certain conditions, ambiguous sentences can be read more slowly than their unambiguous counterparts, suggesting that the parser may create several parses, when required. Finally, we present the first quantitative model of task-driven disambiguation that subsumes the URM, and we show that it can explain both Swets et al.'s results and our findings. KW - Sentence processing KW - Ambiguity KW - Parallel processing KW - Cognitive modeling KW - Unrestricted race model KW - URM KW - Underspecification KW - Good-enough processing Y1 - 2016 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12228 SN - 0364-0213 SN - 1551-6709 VL - 40 SP - 266 EP - 298 PB - Wiley-Blackwell CY - Hoboken ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Laurinavichyute, Anna A1 - Sekerina, Irina A. A1 - Alexeeva, Svetlana A1 - Bagdasaryan, Kristine A1 - Kliegl, Reinhold T1 - Russian Sentence Corpus: Benchmark measures of eye movements in reading in Russian JF - Behavior research methods : a journal of the Psychonomic Society N2 - This article introduces a new corpus of eye movements in silent readingthe Russian Sentence Corpus (RSC). Russian uses the Cyrillic script, which has not yet been investigated in cross-linguistic eye movement research. As in every language studied so far, we confirmed the expected effects of low-level parameters, such as word length, frequency, and predictability, on the eye movements of skilled Russian readers. These findings allow us to add Slavic languages using Cyrillic script (exemplified by Russian) to the growing number of languages with different orthographies, ranging from the Roman-based European languages to logographic Asian ones, whose basic eye movement benchmarks conform to the universal comparative science of reading (Share, 2008). We additionally report basic descriptive corpus statistics and three exploratory investigations of the effects of Russian morphology on the basic eye movement measures, which illustrate the kinds of questions that researchers can answer using the RSC. The annotated corpus is freely available from its project page at the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/x5q2r/. KW - Reading KW - Eye movements KW - Russian KW - Ambiguity KW - Part of speech KW - Corpus Y1 - 2019 U6 - https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1051-6 SN - 1554-351X SN - 1554-3528 VL - 51 IS - 3 SP - 1161 EP - 1178 PB - Springer CY - New York ER - TY - BOOK A1 - Gerken, Stefanie A1 - Uebernickel, Falk A1 - de Paula, Danielly T1 - Design Thinking: a Global Study on Implementation Practices in Organizations T1 - Design Thinking: eine globale Studie über Implementierungspraktiken in Organisationen BT - Past - Present - Future BT - Vergangenheit - Gegenwart - Zukunft N2 - These days design thinking is no longer a “new approach”. Among practitioners, as well as academics, interest in the topic has gathered pace over the last two decades. However, opinions are divided over the longevity of the phenomenon: whether design thinking is merely “old wine in new bottles,” a passing trend, or still evolving as it is being spread to an increasing number of organizations and industries. Despite its growing relevance and the diffusion of design thinking, knowledge on the actual status quo in organizations remains scarce. With a new study, the research team of Prof. Uebernickel and Stefanie Gerken investigates temporal developments and changes in design thinking practices in organizations over the past six years comparing the results of the 2015 “Parts without a whole” study with current practices and future developments. Companies of all sizes and from different parts of the world participated in the survey. The findings from qualitative interviews with experts, i.e., people who have years of knowledge with design thinking, were cross-checked with the results from an exploratory analysis of the survey data. This analysis uncovers significant variances and similarities in how design thinking is interpreted and applied in businesses. N2 - Heutzutage ist Design Thinking kein "neuer Ansatz" mehr. Unter Praktikern und Akademikern hat das Interesse an diesem Thema in den letzten zwei Jahrzehnten stark zugenommen. Die Meinungen sind jedoch geteilt, ob Design Thinking lediglich "alter Wein in neuen Schläuchen" ist, ein vorübergehender Trend, oder ein sich weiterentwickelndes Phänomen, welches in immer mehr Organisationen und Branchen Fuß fast. Trotz der wachsenden Relevanz und Verbreitung von Design Thinking ist das Wissen über den tatsächlichen Status quo in Organisationen nach wie vor spärlich. Mit einer neuen Studie untersucht das Forschungsteam von Prof. Uebernickel, Stefanie Gerken und Dr. Danielly de Paula die zeitlichen Entwicklungen und Veränderungen von Design Thinking Praktiken in Organisationen über die letzten sechs Jahre und vergleicht die Ergebnisse der Studie "Parts without a whole" aus dem Jahr 2015 mit aktuellen Praktiken und perspektivischen Entwicklungen. An der Studie haben Unternehmen aller Größen und aus verschiedenen Teilen der Welt teilgenommen. Um dem komplexen Untersuchungsgegenstand gerecht zu werden, wurde eine Mixed-Method-Ansatz gewählt: Die Erkenntnisse aus qualitativen Experteninterviews, d.h. Personen, die sich seit Jahren mit dem Thema Design Thinking in der Praxis beschäftigen, wurden mit den Ergebnissen einer quantitativen Analyse von Umfragedaten abgeglichen. Die vorliegende Studie erörtert signifikante Unterschiede und Gemeinsamkeiten bei der Interpretation und Anwendung von Design Thinking in Unternehmen. KW - Design Thinking KW - Agile KW - Implementation in Organizations KW - life-centered KW - human-centered KW - Innovation KW - Behavior change KW - Problem Solving KW - Creative KW - Solution Space KW - Process KW - Mindset KW - Tools KW - Wicked Problems KW - VUCA-World KW - Ambiguity KW - Interdisciplinary Teams KW - Multidisciplinary Teams KW - Impact KW - Measurement KW - Ideation KW - Agilität KW - agil KW - Ambiguität KW - Verhaltensänderung KW - Kreativität KW - Design Thinking KW - Ideenfindung KW - Auswirkungen KW - Implementierung in Organisationen KW - Innovation KW - interdisziplinäre Teams KW - Messung KW - Denkweise KW - multidisziplinäre Teams KW - Problemlösung KW - Prozess KW - Lösungsraum KW - Werkzeuge KW - Aktivitäten KW - verzwickte Probleme KW - menschenzentriert KW - lebenszentriert KW - VUCA-World Y1 - 2022 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-534668 SN - 978-3-86956-525-5 PB - Universitätsverlag Potsdam CY - Potsdam ER -