Two experiments examined the processing of objects with low name agreement. Experiment I compared naming latencies for objects with three different types of name disagreement to those for matched control objects with very high name agreement. Objects with low name agreement due to abbreviations (e.g. phone) were named no more slowly than were control objects. Objects with multiple names (e.g. couch, sofa, settee) and objects often given incorrect names (e.g. spider for ant) took longer to name correctly than did matched controls. These results were confirmed in a second naming experiment using a revised set of high-name-agreement control stimuli. In Experiment 2, subjects carried out an object decision task using the revised stimulus set. Subjects could recognize objects with multiple names as quickly as those with high name agreement. Objects often given incorrect names were recognized by subjects more slowly than were high-agreement matched stimuli. The pattern of data suggests that the delay in naming latency due to the availability of more than one correct name arises after structural recognition. In contrast, the slowed naming of objects often misnamed would seem to originate from difficulties encountered at or before the structural stage of recognition.

Data are reported on picture naming under speeded deadline conditions. In Experiment 1, more errors were made in response to pictures with low-relative to high-frequency names, indicating that the deadline constrained name selection. In addition, subjects often made prime-related perseverative errors, in which they misnamed target pictures by giving them the names of related pictures that had been named previously (primes). In Experiment 2, prime-related perseverative errors did not occur at a greater than chance level when subjects categorized rather than named prime pictures. In Experiment 3, these errors did not occur at a greater than chance level when subjects first named related prime words. It is concluded that prime-related perseverative errors reflect persistent activation in the mappings connecting semantic representations of pictures to name representations. The relevance of the findings for models of picture naming and the use of the deadline technique for decomposing the picture-naming process are discussed. This work was supported by a grant from the Economic and Social Research Council of Great Britain. Experiments 2 and 3 were reported to the Experimental Psychology Society, London, January 1990.We would like to thank T. Carr, M. Smith, and an anonymous reviewer for comments and suggestions on an earlier draft of this article.

No abstract

No abstract

Three picture naming experiments are reported which examine the relationship between the apparent inhibition of a response on one trial, and naming latency on the subsequent trial. The design of each experiment involves the presentation of prime and target pairs, either presented in succession (Lag 1 condition), or separated by two intervening unrelated trials (Lag 3 condition). A control condition is also included. In Experiment 1, a speeded picture naming task is used, and naming errors are analysed. Target pictures are misnamed at above chance rates with the name of the semantically related prime picture in the Lag 3 condition. In contrast, these prime-related errors do not occur in the Lag 1 condition, suggesting a brief inhibitory effect. If primes are briefly inhibited, then target naming latencies immediately following a related prime should be quicker than target latencies in the Lag 3 condition. Experiment 2 confirms this pattern of results, using exactly the same stimuli and design, but standard naming instructions. Experiment 3 examines whether the inferred inhibition is the result of a self-inhibitory mechanism, using a repetition priming paradigm. If Lag 1 prime representations are self-inhibited, then facilitatory effects from prime/target repetition should be stronger in the Lag 3 condition, than in the Lag 1 condition. The data from Expt 3 were not consistent with this prediction. Taken together, the results of the three experiments suggest that a brief inhibitory effect occurs after retrieval of an object name, and that the inhibition may be accomplished by mechanisms other than self-inhibition.