Images, Predicates, and Retrieval Cues

Jones, Gregory V.

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-1391-2_8

Cited by 20 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Jones (2002) finds further support for the role of EoP from a study by Jones (1988), which showed that ''. .…”

Section: Memory Retrievalmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…We did query this, quite reasonably, since he had not included the generation of predicates in his 1985 study. We are criticised however for not knowing that Jones (1988) collected measures of the time it took subjects to produce two predicates to each word and went on to show that measures of the time taken correlated highly with EoP ratings. We admit the oversight.…”

Section: Generation Of Predicatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Jones (1988) argues that the method of predicate and feature generation we chose is a ''relatively insensitive procedure'' (p. 92). Nevertheless, this procedure is now widely used and is generally viewed as a valid means of acquiring Ôproperty normÕ data for building connectionist models (e.g., Devlin, Gonnerman, Andersen, & Seidenberg, 1998;Tyler, Moss, Durrant-Peatfield, & Levy, 2000).…”

Section: Jonesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…He lists four deficiencies in our paper: (i) we attribute to Jones (1985) a definition of ease of predication that is incorrect; (ii) we claim that ease of predication is an unreliable measure, when in fact we obtained high measures of (statistical) reliability; (iii) we claim that the ease of predication judgements of Jones (1985) had not been compared with the generation of actual predicates (carried out by Jones, 1988); and (iv) we attribute to Jones the assumption that features and predicates are one and the same.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Ease of predication does not account for imageability effects in performance: A reply to Jones (2002)

Davies

Funnell

2003

Brain and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Copyright and moral rights to this thesis/research project are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. The work is supplied on the understanding that any use for commercial gain is strictly forbidden. A copy may be downloaded for personal, non-commercial, research or study without prior permission and without charge. Any use of the thesis/research project for private study or research must be properly acknowledged with reference to the work's full bibliographic details.This thesis/research project may not be reproduced in any format or medium, or extensive quotations taken from it, or its content changed in any way, without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s).If you believe that any material held in the repository infringes copyright law, please contact the Repository Team at Middlesex University via the following email address:eprints@mdx.ac.ukThe item will be removed from the repository while any claim is being investigated. AbstractIn this paper we defend our views against JonesÕ (2002) claim that the criticism of the ease of predication hypothesis (Jones, 1985) made by de Mornay Davies and Funnell (2000) is ''fundamentally flawed.'' Jones raises five issues concerning the content of the text, the reliability of effects of ease of predication, the generation of predicates, semantic features, and memory retrieval. We address each of these issues in turn and show that either a critical point raised is not made, or the point is mistaken. More importantly we show that our empirical findings, which are entirely overlooked by Jones, unequivocally support the view that ease of predication does not account for imageability effects in performance.

show abstract

“…Jones (2002) finds further support for the role of EoP from a study by Jones (1988), which showed that ''. .…”

Section: Memory Retrievalmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Generation Of Predicatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Jonesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Ease of predication does not account for imageability effects in performance: A reply to Jones (2002)

Davies

Funnell

2003

Brain and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, possible candidates for the function of vividness increment over time may include an "enhancement" function in the visuospatial sketchpad to stabilize the quality of the image [10], or an increase over time in the semantic information related to the image [11], or an increase in the level of detail in the image [12]. For example, possible candidates for the function of vividness increment over time may include an "enhancement" function in the visuospatial sketchpad to stabilize the quality of the image [10], or an increase over time in the semantic information related to the image [11], or an increase in the level of detail in the image [12].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Probing Vividness Increment through Imagery Interruption

Reeves

2003

Imagination, Cognition and Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the present study was to trace how visual experience changes over time during mental image generation, by using an interruption paradigm. In one experiment, participants were asked to read the verbal descriptions of eight common objects and imagine these objects. Changes in the quality of the images evoked by the eight stimuli were probed by interrupting the visual mental image generation process at various times from 0 to 1.7 s, and asking participants to rate the vividness of their image at the time of interruption. We found that vividness increased as the time allowed for image generation was augmented. This relationship was consistently detected in half of the participants and for all stimuli. The present findings support the implicit assumption of some current imagery models positing that mental images "improve" over time, and reject the alternative that images are generated in full detail before becoming accessible to consciousness. However, the "incremental" view is unsatisfactory for imagery models which make no (or not enough) room for individual differences.

show abstract

Imagery and the Brain

Richardson¹

1991

Imagery and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Images, Predicates, and Retrieval Cues

Cited by 20 publications

References 13 publications

Ease of predication does not account for imageability effects in performance: A reply to Jones (2002)

Ease of predication does not account for imageability effects in performance: A reply to Jones (2002)

Probing Vividness Increment through Imagery Interruption

Imagery and the Brain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About