Results 1 - 10
of
26
Lexical selection is not by competition: a reinterpretation of semantic interference and facilitation effects in the picture-word interference paradigm
- J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN MEM COGN
, 2007
"... The dominant view in the field of lexical access in speech production maintains that selection of a word becomes more difficult as the levels of activation of nontarget words increase—selection by competition. The authors tested this prediction in two sets of experiments. First, the authors show tha ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 48 (10 self)
- Add to MetaCart
The dominant view in the field of lexical access in speech production maintains that selection of a word becomes more difficult as the levels of activation of nontarget words increase—selection by competition. The authors tested this prediction in two sets of experiments. First, the authors show that participants are faster to name pictures of objects (e.g., “bed”) in the context of semantically related verb distractors (e.g., sleep) compared with unrelated verb distractors (e.g., shoot). In the second set of experiments, the authors show that target naming latencies (e.g., “horse”) are, if anything, faster for within-category semantically close distractor words (e.g., zebra) than for within-category semantically far distractor words (e.g., whale). In the context of previous research, these data ground a new empirical generalization: As distractor words become semantically closer to the target concepts—all else being equal—target naming is facilitated. This fact means that lexical selection does not involve competition, and consequently, that the semantic interference effect does not reflect a lexical level process. This conclusion has important implications for models of lexical access and interpretations of Stroop-like interference effects.
Why look? Reasons for eye movements related to language production
- In
, 2004
"... Compared to generating an utterance, comprehending one is a piece of cake. Comprehenders have information from multiple sources to draw on as they form an interpretation that is good enough for their current purposes (e.g., Clark, 1996; Ferreira, Ferraro, & Bailey, 2002). For example, in face-t ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 32 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Compared to generating an utterance, comprehending one is a piece of cake. Comprehenders have information from multiple sources to draw on as they form an interpretation that is good enough for their current purposes (e.g., Clark, 1996; Ferreira, Ferraro, & Bailey, 2002). For example, in face-to-face conversation listeners have access to background knowledge about the current situation and experience with the person speaking, in addition to the actual words said and how they are uttered. As a result, listeners are often able to recognize a word before it is completely articulated (Cooper, 1974; Marslen-Wilson, 1973). Studying a process that takes so little time and that benefits so greatly from context is a challenge. One way in
Tracing attention and the activation flow in spoken word planning using eye movements
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
"... The flow of activation from concepts to phonological forms within the word production system was examined in 3 experiments. In Experiment 1, participants named pictures while ignoring superimposed distractor pictures that were semantically related, phonologically related, or unrelated. Eye movements ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 16 (7 self)
- Add to MetaCart
The flow of activation from concepts to phonological forms within the word production system was examined in 3 experiments. In Experiment 1, participants named pictures while ignoring superimposed distractor pictures that were semantically related, phonologically related, or unrelated. Eye movements and naming latencies were recorded. The distractor pictures affected the latencies of gaze shifting and vocal naming. The magnitude of the phonological effects increased linearly with latency, excluding lapses of attention as the cause of the effects. In Experiment 2, no distractor effects were obtained when both pictures were named. When pictures with superimposed distractor words were named or the words were read in Experiment 3, the words influenced the latencies of gaze shifting and picture naming, but the pictures yielded no such latency effects in word reading. The picture–word asymmetry was obtained even with equivalent reading and naming latencies. The picture–picture effects suggest that activation spreads continuously from concepts to phonological forms, whereas the picture–word asymmetry indicates that the amount of activation is limited and task dependent.
Distance-dependent processing of pictures and words
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
, 2009
"... A series of 8 experiments investigated the association between pictorial and verbal representations and the psychological distance of the referent objects from the observer. The results showed that people better process pictures that represent proximal objects and words that represent distal objects ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 13 (5 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
A series of 8 experiments investigated the association between pictorial and verbal representations and the psychological distance of the referent objects from the observer. The results showed that people better process pictures that represent proximal objects and words that represent distal objects than pictures that represent distal objects and words that represent proximal objects. These results were obtained with various psychological distance dimensions (spatial, temporal, and social), different tasks (classification and categorization), and different measures (speed of processing and selective attention). The authors argue that differences in the processing of pictures and words emanate from the physical similarity of pictures, but not words, to the referents. Consequently, perceptual analysis is commonly applied to pictures but not to words. Pictures thus impart a sense of closeness to the referent objects and are preferably used to represent such objects, whereas words do not convey proximity and are preferably used to represent distal objects in space, time, and social perspective.
Bindings between stimuli and multiple response codes dominate long-lag repetition priming in speeded classification tasks
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
, 2009
"... Repetition priming is often thought to reflect the facilitation of 1 or more processes engaged during initial and subsequent presentations of a stimulus. Priming can also reflect the formation of direct, stimulus– response (S-R) bindings, retrieval of which bypasses many of the processes engaged dur ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 7 (4 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Repetition priming is often thought to reflect the facilitation of 1 or more processes engaged during initial and subsequent presentations of a stimulus. Priming can also reflect the formation of direct, stimulus– response (S-R) bindings, retrieval of which bypasses many of the processes engaged during the initial presentation. Using long-lag repetition priming of semantic classification of visual stimuli, the authors used task switches between study and test phases to reveal several signatures of S-R learning in Experiments 1 through 5. Indeed, the authors found surprisingly little, if any, evidence of priming that could not be attributed to S-R learning, once they considered the possibility that stimuli are simulta-neously bound to multiple, different response codes. Experiments 6 and 7 provided more direct evidence for independent contributions from at least 3 levels of response representation: the action (e.g., specific finger used), the decision (e.g., yes–no), and the task-specific classification (e.g., bigger–smaller). Although S-R learning has been discussed previously in many contexts, the present results go beyond existing theories of S-R learning. Moreover, its dominant role brings into question many interpretations of priming during speeded classification tasks in terms of perceptual–conceptual processing.
Picture naming in picture context: Semantic interference or semantic facilitation
- Psychology Science
, 2003
"... Glaser and Glaser (1989) reported that naming a target picture takes more time when it is accompanied by a semantically related context picture than when it is accompanied by an unrelated context picture. This fi nding can be accounted for in current models of language production by assuming that at ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 6 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Glaser and Glaser (1989) reported that naming a target picture takes more time when it is accompanied by a semantically related context picture than when it is accompanied by an unrelated context picture. This fi nding can be accounted for in current models of language production by assuming that at a lexical level the names of the two pic-tures compete for selection. In this article we argue that there are reasons to doubt the generalizability of Glaser and Glaser’s fi nding. Most importantly, results of recent pic-ture-naming and word-translation studies strongly suggest that context pictures do not automatically activate their names. In Experiment 1 we replicated Glaser and Glaser’s semantic interference effect, but also obtained some evidence that this fi nding is due to the erroneous selection of the context picture. In Experiment 2, in which measures were taken to ease the selection of the target picture, a small semantic facilitation effect was obtained. Implications of this fi nding for models of language production are discussed.
In Search of Perceptual Priming in a Semantic Classification Task
"... Four experiments tested for perceptual priming for written words in a semantic categorization task. Repetition priming was obtained for low-frequency words when unrelated categorizations were performed at study and test (Experiment 1), but it was not orthographically mediated given that writtento-wr ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 4 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Four experiments tested for perceptual priming for written words in a semantic categorization task. Repetition priming was obtained for low-frequency words when unrelated categorizations were performed at study and test (Experiment 1), but it was not orthographically mediated given that writtento-written and spoken-to-written word priming was equivalent (Experiments 2 and 3). Furthermore, no priming was obtained between pictures and words (Experiment 4), suggesting that the nonorthographic priming was largely phonological rather than semantic. These results pose a challenge to standard perceptual theories of priming that should expect orthographic priming when words are presented in a visual format at study and test. Long-term priming refers to a facilitation in processing a stimulus as a consequence of encoding the same or a related stimulus in an earlier episode. For example, participants are generally faster and more accurate in making lexical decisions to words studied a few minutes earlier, at least when the words are low frequency (e.g., Bowers, 2000). This facilitation can last hours, and sometimes longer, distinguishing it from semantic and masked priming
The distractor picture paradox in speech production: Evidence from the word translation task
- Journal of Psycholinguistic Research
, 2009
"... Abstract Several naming studies show that distractor pictures, even when intentionally ignored by the speaker, are still capable of activating their respective phonological repre-sentations. However results from word translation studies suggest that distractor pictures are only conceptually activate ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 2 (1 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract Several naming studies show that distractor pictures, even when intentionally ignored by the speaker, are still capable of activating their respective phonological repre-sentations. However results from word translation studies suggest that distractor pictures are only conceptually activated. Here we tested the reliability of the word translation results. In four experiments, bilingual participants translated words from one language to the other one while ignoring the presentation of pictures. In Experiment 1a phonological related pic-tures sped up translation latencies. However, the effect disappeared when the percentage of related trials was reduced (Experiment 1b). In Experiment 2a translation latencies were faster when the words were accompanied by semantically related pictures than by unre-lated pictures. Importantly, the effect was still reliable when the proportion of related trials was reduced and the total number of semantic categories was increased (Experiment 2b). Theoretical implications of the influence of distractor pictures during speech production are discussed.
A Joint Interference Effect in Picture Naming
"... Abstract In two experiments we provided evidence for a joint interference effect in picture naming. Participants took longer to name pictures when they believed that their partner concurrently named pictures than when they believed their partner was silent (Experiment 1) or concurrently categorized ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract In two experiments we provided evidence for a joint interference effect in picture naming. Participants took longer to name pictures when they believed that their partner concurrently named pictures than when they believed their partner was silent (Experiment 1) or concurrently categorized the pictures as being from the same or from different semantic categories (Experiment 2). However, picture naming latencies were not affected by beliefs about what one's partner said. These findings are consistent with the idea that speakers represent whether another speaker is preparing to speak, but not what they are preparing to say.
