Monday, January 16, 2023

Getting in the right mood for enhancing your work (and even pronunciation!)

You "up" for a little meta-theory? 

Fascinating study, open source, published in Frontiers in Communication by Lai, Berkum and Hagoort: Negative affect increases reanalysis of conflicts between discourse context and world knowledge. Here is the researchers' conclusion: 

"These results suggest that mood does not influence all processes involved in discourse processing. Specifically, mood does not influence lexical-semantic retrieval (N400), but it does influence elaborative processes for sense making (P600) during discourse processing."

Not quite sure how to feel about this fascinating research at this moment . . . but it should interesting from some perspective, regardless of your general mood or affect as you read about it. In essence, what the research establishes, not surprisingly, is that if you are in a rotten mood at the moment you might be better at deconstructing what follows, identifying the fudging, etc. (As it turns out, the fact that I had just gotten back from a great run on my first read of the research report may have been "colored" by all those endorphins!)

The complete structure of the study is a bit complex to unpack (but you can here, however, or check out the Neuroscience.com summary). Basically, subjects attempted to identify different features of a narrative/story working within two conditions, one more emotionally "negative;" the other, considerably less so. In effect, mood did not appear to impact their ability to focus in on details but it did influence their success at arriving at an integrated understanding or interpretation of the overall narrative or discourse. 

Does that make sense? Of course . . .  So does the application of that work to pronunciation teaching! (Actually, it almost explains a number of things and people in this field, but I'll stick to pronunciation teaching!) 

There are number of pairs of binary (or false) conceptual distinctions that are of more or less utility to us as we sit down to work on a problem as heuristics or mnemonics at best where mood (in several senses) may figure in prominently, whether the mind set of the analyst at the moment or the degree to which mood (affect/emotion et al) is subsumed in  concepts involving attention to or focus on: 
  • digital vs analogical 
  • accuracy vs fluency
  • segmentals vs supra-segmentals
  • structure vs meaning or function
  • sentence-level vs discourse-level context
  • experiential vs cognitive/pre-frontal engagement
  • affect vs metacognitive 
  • particle vs wave/field analysis
  • individual vs group engagement and learning
  • local vs global constructs
  • visual vs auditory
  • learner autonomy vs learner indoctrination 
  • critical vs inquiry-based thought
  • conscious vs unconscious processing
  • left vs right hemisphere-like processing
And how do or should those relate to (KINETIK) pronunciation teaching and learning? Not much, if at all. What contemporary neuroscience reveals very convincingly is that overemphasis on any of those earlier, simple binary distinctions, many of them but remnants or artifacts of earlier "science,"  especially in combination, can be fatal.

Ideas don't die . . . but people (and students) do. 

Bill

Citation: Lai VT, van Berkum J and Hagoort P (2022) Negative affect increases reanalysis of conflicts between discourse context and world knowledge. Front. Commun. 7:910482. doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2022.910482

1 comment:

  1. I will be following up on this post next week, focusing on how this "binary/nonbinary" perspective underlies contemporary theoretical frameworks in the field and the significant operating principles of the KINETIK Method that follow from it.

    ReplyDelete