ผลต่างระหว่างรุ่นของ "หน้าหลัก"

จาก wiki.surinsanghasociety
ไปยังการนำทาง ไปยังการค้นหา
ล
ล
แถว 1: แถว 1:
−
Essential and legitimate signifies to keep group identity and cohesion (Rutland
+
Their structure (cf., Krott et al., 2006). English compounds, like Italian compounds
−
Required and genuine suggests to maintain group identity and cohesion (Rutland, Killen,   Abrams, 2010). More than the past 15 years, a single line of analysis in moral improvement has focused on when group-based exclusion is or is just not viewed as morally wrong, or on how the context (e.g., situational, cultural, historical, national) in which social exclusion occurs may well relate to this evaluation. This approach is component of a broader area of analysis on developmental intergroup attitudes, which examines the origins of prejudice and intergroup bias and has been the concentrate of integrative analysis among social and developmental psychologists (Dunham  Degner, 2010; Killen  Rutland, 2011; Quintana  McKown, 2008). The current study brought together the fields of intergroup contact (Allport, 1954), cultural identity (Phinney, 1992; Social Identity Theory: Tajfel  Turner, 1986), and moral improvement (Social Reasoning Developmental viewpoint: Social Domain Theory integrated with Social Identity Theory: Rutland et al., 2010) to examine moral judgments within the context of Jewish-Arab peer encounters and situations (intergroup get in touch with and cultural identity) below which it is actually viewed as incorrect or reputable to exclude a peer depending on cultural identity (see Figure 1). Recent research has documented the damaging intergroup attitudes involving Jewish and Arab youth and adults in the Middle East (Bar-Tal  Teichman, 2005; Brenick et al., 2007, 2010), but little is recognized about how these negative intergroup biases manifest in cultural communities within the U.S. The U.S. context is one of a kind in that it gives an chance to study intergroup attitudes about Jewish-Arab relations inside a cultural setting removed in the everyday stress and tension of an intractable conflict, the existence of very segregated communities, and an overarching national ideology arguably supporting an ethnocratic state (Yiftachel, 2006). As inside the Middle East, cultural stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination towards Muslim and Arab groups as well as adverse intergroup tensions between Jews and Arabs exist within the U.S. (Alliance of Civilizations, 2006; Anti-Defamation League, 2011; Panagopoulos, 2006). When tiny is identified about U.S. children's or adolescents' attitudes towards peers of Arab descent, one current exception can be a study in which non-Arab American children viewed their own peer group as inclusive, but anticipated peers of Arab descent to become exclusive and prefer to be with their own cultural group (Hitti  Killen, 2013). Investigation with U.S. college students has shown that damaging attitudes towards Arab folks manifest across a variety of contexts, like becoming far more fearful and suspicious if essential to attend an Islamic religious service (than an unnamed religious service), and lacking a willingness or feeling threatened if made to engage in simple social interactions ranging from introducing oneself, to dating an Arab (Jenkins, Ruppel, Kizer, Yehl,  Griffin, 2012; Sergent, Woods,  Sedlacek, 1992), and, especially for Jewish-American participants and participants who didn't know a Muslim personally, supporting racial profiling of Arabs and Muslims (Kim, 2004). Nevertheless, the bigger societal and historical context within the U.S. is one supportive of multiculturalism (even when not entirely inclusive of Arab and Muslim individuals), and as a result is very distinctive from that surrounding Jewish-Arab relationships inside the Mid-East, because the U.S.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscrip.
+
Their structure (cf., Krott et al., 2006). English compounds, like Italian compounds, usually do not carry a normal morphological reflex of compound structure. Fiorentino and Poeppel (2007) give proof that lexicalized English compounds are decomposed into morphological constituents. They utilized a visual lexical selection activity together using the electrophysiological brain-imaging approach magnetoencephalography (MEG), comparing the processing of lexicalized compounds (e.g., teacup) and matched lengthy monomorphemic words (e.g., throttle). The outcomes showed faster response times and earlier latency from the M350 element, argued to index lexical access, for the compounds compared to the monomorphemic words. This finding was interpreted as reflecting constituent activation for the lexicalized compounds. As this study did not manipulate aspects which may possibly reflect post-decompositional, integrative processing, further neurophysiological investigation on the processing of English compounds is named for.1 In addition, effects of morphological constituent access and effects of morphological combination have seldom been investigated systematically inside the exact same study (and have not been investigated with visually-presented lexicalized and novel English compounds, to our expertise). A current study that approached this problem for auditorily-presented English compounds is MacGregor and Shtyrov (2013), who utilized a mismatch negativity paradigm and showed effects of whole-word frequency for semantically opaque but not transparent compounds within the mismatch negativity time window (130?60 ms post-onset from the second constituent), and increased negativities for transparent than opaque compounds, for low- in comparison with high-frequency compounds, and for pseudocompounds (akin for the novel compounds inside the present study) in their N400 time window (350?00 ms post-onset of the second constituent). They interpret these effects as reflecting at the very least in part recourse to combinatorial processing for transparent compounds, with a additional main reliance on stored lexical representation for opaque compounds (given that opaque compounds yielded effects ofNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript1See also Pratarelli (1995) to get a study on English auditorily presented compounds working with a picture-word priming activity, showing N400 responses sensitive to semantic relatedness amongst the image in addition to a subsequently presented compound with either complete overlap or overlap of a shared morpheme amongst the picture and compound word. Cogn Neuropsychol. Author manuscript; offered in PMC 2015 January 01.Fiorentino et al.Pagefrequency in the mismatch negativity, and significantly less adverse N400s than transparent compounds, that is taken to implicate less combinatorial processing).NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptParticipantsAs discussed above, investigating this challenge with visually-presented compounds delivers a crucial test case for the extent of morpheme-based processing in compounds, and for elucidating the neurophysiological mechanisms that help this processing. In the visual modality, compound appears at after as an alternative to unfolding more than time, and will not carry prosodic markers of morphological status like auditory compounds may well (see, e.g., Koester et al., 2004; Isel, Gunter,  Friederici, 2003 for discussion of prosody in compounds); additionally, in English, compounds do not carry a morphological marker of compound structure, offering a.

รุ่นแก้ไขเมื่อ 00:24, 14 สิงหาคม 2564

Their structure (cf., Krott et al., 2006). English compounds, like Italian compounds Their structure (cf., Krott et al., 2006). English compounds, like Italian compounds, usually do not carry a normal morphological reflex of compound structure. Fiorentino and Poeppel (2007) give proof that lexicalized English compounds are decomposed into morphological constituents. They utilized a visual lexical selection activity together using the electrophysiological brain-imaging approach magnetoencephalography (MEG), comparing the processing of lexicalized compounds (e.g., teacup) and matched lengthy monomorphemic words (e.g., throttle). The outcomes showed faster response times and earlier latency from the M350 element, argued to index lexical access, for the compounds compared to the monomorphemic words. This finding was interpreted as reflecting constituent activation for the lexicalized compounds. As this study did not manipulate aspects which may possibly reflect post-decompositional, integrative processing, further neurophysiological investigation on the processing of English compounds is named for.1 In addition, effects of morphological constituent access and effects of morphological combination have seldom been investigated systematically inside the exact same study (and have not been investigated with visually-presented lexicalized and novel English compounds, to our expertise). A current study that approached this problem for auditorily-presented English compounds is MacGregor and Shtyrov (2013), who utilized a mismatch negativity paradigm and showed effects of whole-word frequency for semantically opaque but not transparent compounds within the mismatch negativity time window (130?60 ms post-onset from the second constituent), and increased negativities for transparent than opaque compounds, for low- in comparison with high-frequency compounds, and for pseudocompounds (akin for the novel compounds inside the present study) in their N400 time window (350?00 ms post-onset of the second constituent). They interpret these effects as reflecting at the very least in part recourse to combinatorial processing for transparent compounds, with a additional main reliance on stored lexical representation for opaque compounds (given that opaque compounds yielded effects ofNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript1See also Pratarelli (1995) to get a study on English auditorily presented compounds working with a picture-word priming activity, showing N400 responses sensitive to semantic relatedness amongst the image in addition to a subsequently presented compound with either complete overlap or overlap of a shared morpheme amongst the picture and compound word. Cogn Neuropsychol. Author manuscript; offered in PMC 2015 January 01.Fiorentino et al.Pagefrequency in the mismatch negativity, and significantly less adverse N400s than transparent compounds, that is taken to implicate less combinatorial processing).NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptParticipantsAs discussed above, investigating this challenge with visually-presented compounds delivers a crucial test case for the extent of morpheme-based processing in compounds, and for elucidating the neurophysiological mechanisms that help this processing. In the visual modality, compound appears at after as an alternative to unfolding more than time, and will not carry prosodic markers of morphological status like auditory compounds may well (see, e.g., Koester et al., 2004; Isel, Gunter, Friederici, 2003 for discussion of prosody in compounds); additionally, in English, compounds do not carry a morphological marker of compound structure, offering a.

ดึงข้อมูลจาก "https://wiki.surinsanghasociety.com/index.php?title=หน้าหลัก&oldid=283635"