A1 Refereed original research article in a scientific journal
Context and working memory capacity affect the processing of written irony in chinese: an eye-tracking study
Authors: Zou, Lijuan; Zhang, Zhijun; Cheng, Xiaoyu; Ma, Yue; Hyönä, Jukka; Li, Shouxin
Publication year: 2026
Journal: Psychological Research
Article number: 67
Volume: 90
Issue: 2
ISSN: 0340-0727
eISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-026-02258-w
Publication's open availability at the time of reporting: Open Access
Publication channel's open availability : Partially Open Access publication channel
Web address : https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-026-02258-w
Self-archived copy’s web address: https://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/detail/Publication/522879517
Self-archived copy's licence: CC BY
Self-archived copy's version: Publisher`s PDF
Written irony is defined as the use of words to express the opposite to the literal meaning. Comprehending ironic praise is more difficult than that of ironic criticism. However, whether and how language context and individuals' working memory capacity (WMC) affect irony comprehension in Chinese whose script is distinct from alphabetic languages are currently unclear and warrant further research. In this study, participants read ironic criticism and ironic praise sentences while their eye movements were recorded. The results showed that the processing of ironic praise needed longer first reading time, regression path time, and total reading time as compared to the ironic criticism. However, no significant difference was found between literal criticism and literal praise. In addition, when the inconsistency between context and the ironic utterance was weak, first-pass and rereading time for ironic praise were significantly longer than those for ironic criticism. However, there was no difference between ironic praise and criticism in the strong context inconsistency condition. Furthermore, participants with low WMC showed significantly longer total reading time for ironic praise than participants with high WMC. Moreover, they read the prior context of ironic praise with longer regression path reading time and rereading time than that of ironic criticism. Taken together, these results suggest that ironic praise is more difficult to read and require more cognitive resources relative to ironic criticism in Chinese, which was similar with findings in Western cultures and scripts. More importantly, prior context and WMC modulated differently the influence on irony comprehension. Specifically, the weak context inconsistency made it harder to understand the ironic praise than ironic criticism, lasting from the early to the late processing stages. However, the influence of WMC mainly occurred in the late integration stage of irony comprehension. This study makes two major theoretical contributions. First, it extends key findings on irony processing-the greater difficulty of understanding ironic praise and the role of context and working memory-to Chinese, a distinct language and cultural system, by confirming that these cognitive mechanisms are universal. Second, it clarifies how these factors operate at different stages of processing and suggests that features of a writing system (such as logographic script) can influence the timing of high-level language comprehension.
Downloadable publication This is an electronic reprint of the original article. |  |
Funding information in the publication:
Open Access funding provided by University of Turku (including Turku University Central Hospital). This study was supported by Humanities and Social Sciences Foundation of Shandong Normal University (2023YTR013), National Natural Science Foundation of China grants (62107012) and National Education Science Planning Foundation of China (DBA2031871100).
