How do people process and evaluate falsehood of sentences? Do people need to compare presented information with the correct answer to determine that a sentence is false, or do they rely on a mismatch between presented sentence components? To illustrate, when confronted with the false sentence 'trains run on highways', does one need to know that trains do not run on highways or does one need to know that trains run on tracks to reject the sentence as false? To investigate these questions, participants were asked to validate sentences that were preceded by images (Experiments 1-3) conveying a truth-congruent or a falsehood-congruent component of the sentence (e.g., an image of tracks/highway preceding the sentence 'trains run on tracks/highways') or by words (Experiment 4) that were either sentence-congruent, truth-congruent, or both (e.g., the word 'train/tracks' preceding the sentence 'trains run on tracks/highways'). Results from four experiments showed that activating sentence-congruent concepts facilitates validation for both false and true sentences but that activating truth-congruent concepts did not aid the validation of false sentences. The present findings suggest that a detection of falsehood relies on a mismatch detection between sentence's components, rather than on the activation of true content in the context of a particular sentence.

中文翻译：

---

检测虚假性依赖于句子成分之间的不匹配检测。

人们如何处理和评估句子的虚假性？人们是否需要将呈现的信息与正确答案进行比较以确定一个句子是错误的，还是他们依赖呈现的句子成分之间的不匹配？举例来说，当面对“火车在高速公路上行驶”的错误句子时，是否需要知道火车不在高速公路上行驶，还是需要知道火车在轨道上行驶以拒绝该句子为假？为了调查这些问题，要求参与者验证句子之前的图像（实验1-3），这些图像传达了句子的真相或虚假成分（例如，句子“ trains”之前的曲目/高速公路图像） （在轨道/高速公路上运行））或通过与句子一致，与事实一致的单词（实验4），或两者（例如，在“火车在轨道/公路上行驶”句子之前的单词“火车/轨道”）。四个实验的结果表明，激活句子一致的概念有助于对假句子和真句子的验证，但是激活真相一致的概念却无助于假句子的验证。目前的发现表明，对虚假性的检测依赖于句子成分之间的不匹配检测，而不是依赖于特定句子上下文中真实内容的激活。四个实验的结果表明，激活句子一致的概念有助于对假句子和真实句子的验证，但是激活真相一致的概念却无助于错误句子的验证。目前的发现表明，对虚假性的检测依赖于句子成分之间的不匹配检测，而不是依赖于特定句子上下文中真实内容的激活。四个实验的结果表明，激活句子一致的概念有助于对假句子和真实句子的验证，但是激活真相一致的概念却无助于错误句子的验证。目前的发现表明，对虚假性的检测依赖于句子成分之间的不匹配检测，而不是依赖于特定句子上下文中真实内容的激活。