Is lexical access autonomous? Evidence from combining overlapping tasks with recording event-related brain potentials

Rabovsky, Milena; Álvarez, Carlos J.; Hohlfeld, Annette; Sommer, Werner

doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2008.05.066

Cited by 23 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, in a lexical decision task, high-and low-frequency words are identified as words faster than nonsense strings are identified as nonwords, but the difference between high-and low-frequency words was smaller at short SOAs than at long SOAs Cleland et al, 2006;Lien et al, 2006;Rabovsky et al, 2008). That is, there was an underadditive interaction with RTs for high-and low-frequency words converging with decreasing SOA.…”

Section: Effects On Taskmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Subsequent experiments have obtained different results Cleland et al, 2006;Gaskell et al, 2008;Lien et al, 2006;Rabovsky et al, 2008), reporting instead that the effects due to word reading are smaller at very short SOAs than they are at long SOAs, at which there should be little interference between the tasks. For example, in a lexical decision task, high-and low-frequency words are identified as words faster than nonsense strings are identified as nonwords, but the difference between high-and low-frequency words was smaller at short SOAs than at long SOAs Cleland et al, 2006;Lien et al, 2006;Rabovsky et al, 2008).…”

Section: Effects On Taskmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…To put this possibility in perspective, we need to review evidence suggestive of simultaneous processing. One class of situations in which some have argued that simultaneous processing or at least partial bottleneck bypass is possible is that of tasks involving word reading, such as phoneme judgment, word recognition, and lexical decision tasks Cleland, Gaskell, Quinlan, & Tamminen, 2006;Gaskell, Quinlan, Tamminen, & Cleland, 2008;Lien et al, 2006;Rabovsky, Álvarez, Hohlfeld, & Sommer, 2008). For most adults, reading is an easy and extremely well-practiced task, so much so that it might be thought of as nearly reflexive or automatic.…”

Section: Effects On Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Backward compatibility effects in younger and older adults

Hartley

Maquestiaux

Festini

et al. 2016

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many dual-task situations, responses to the second of two tasks are slowed when the time between tasks is short. The response-selection bottleneck model of dual-task performance accounts for this phenomenon by assuming that central processing of the second task is blocked by a bottleneck until central processing of Task 1 is complete. This assumption could be called into question if it could be demonstrated that the response to Task 2 affected the central processing of Task 1, a backward response compatibility effect. Such effects are well-established in younger adults. Backward compatibility effects in older (as well as younger) adults were explored in two experiments. The first experiment found clear backward response compatibility effects for younger adults but no evidence of them for older adults. The second experiment explored backward stimulus compatibility and found similar effects in both younger and older adults. Evidence possibly consistent with some pre-bottleneck processing of Task 2 central stages also was found in the second experiment in both age groups. For younger adults, the results provide further evidence falsifying the claim of an immutable response selection bottleneck. For older adults, the evidence suggested that Task 2 affects Task 1 when there is stimulus compatibility but not when there is response compatibility. Under most circumstances, people cannot perform two tasks at exactly the same time without interference, even when both tasks are very simple. As the temporal overlap between the two tasks increases, the time to perform the second task increases monotonically. Conversely, in many situations for each additional millisecond that the stimulus of the second task is delayed after the onset of the stimulus of the first task (the stimulus onset asynchrony or SOA), the reaction time (RT) to the second task drops by 1 ms. By contrast, the RT to the first task is largely unaffected by SOA. The slowing of the second task at short SOAs often is called the psychological refractory period (PRP) effect by analogy with the time after firing when a neuron is unresponsive to further input (Telford, 1931;Vince, 1948;Welford, 1952). The PRP effect has been replicated in a large number of experiments, thus deserving the status of one of the few laws of contemporary cognitive psychology. Pashler (1994Pashler ( , 1998 provides reviews and overviews of the research and theory (also see Spence, 2008;Tombu & Jolicoeur, 2005).The most successful account of the PRP effect is the response-selection bottleneck (RSB) model, the principal tenet of which is that central processing can be performed for one and only one task at any particular time. Central processing of one of the tasks must be delayed until central processing of the other task is complete. This leads to the prediction that each millisecond by which the arrival of the second task is delayed will be 1 ms that it will not have to wait for the central processing mechanism to become free. Central processing involves processes of mapping...

show abstract

Section: Effects On Taskmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Effects On Taskmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Effects On Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Backward compatibility effects in younger and older adults

Hartley

Maquestiaux

Festini

et al. 2016

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the dependency of linguistic processes on attention is still a matter of debate [4]. Attention-dependent effects in visual word recognition have been studied using the classical “overlapping task paradigm” in which two stimuli requiring separate responses are presented rapidly in a row [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

ERP Characterization of Sustained Attention Effects in Visual Lexical Categorization

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As our understanding of the basic processes underlying reading is growing, the key role played by attention in this process becomes evident. Two research topics are of particular interest in this domain: (1) it is still undetermined whether sustained attention affects lexical decision tasks; (2) the influence of attention on early visual processing (i.e., before orthographic or lexico-semantic processing stages) remains largely under-specified. Here we investigated early perceptual modulations by sustained attention using an ERP paradigm adapted from Thierry et al. [1]. Participants had to decide whether visual stimuli presented in pairs pertained to a pre-specified category (lexical categorization focus on word or pseudoword pairs). Depending on the lexical category of the first item of a pair, participants either needed to fully process the second item (hold condition) or could release their attention and make a decision without full processing of the second item (release condition). The P1 peak was unaffected by sustained attention. The N1 was delayed and reduced after the second item of a pair when participants released their attention. Release of sustained attention also reduced a P3 wave elicited by the first item of a pair and abolished the P3 wave elicited by the second. Our results are consistent with differential effects of sustained attention on early processing stages and working memory. Sustained attention modulated early processing stages during a lexical decision task without inhibiting the process of stimulus integration. On the contrary, working memory involvement/updating was highly dependent upon the allocation of sustained attention. Moreover, the influence of sustained attention on both early and late cognitive processes was independent of lexical categorization focus.

show abstract

“…They assessed the amplitude and latency of the N400 wave elicited by words that were semantically related or unrelated to the context, as well as the amplitude and latency of the P300 wave elicited by high or low frequency words (LFWs). Overall, their conclusion was that neither semantic nor lexical processing can proceed without attention (but see Rabovsky et al, 2008). Converging evidence regarding the role of attention in word reading is also provided by studies on mindless reading (e.g., Reichle et al, 2010; Schad et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial attention in written word perception

Montani

Facoetti

Zorzi

2014

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of attention in visual word recognition and reading aloud is a long debated issue. Studies of both developmental and acquired reading disorders provide growing evidence that spatial attention is critically involved in word reading, in particular for the phonological decoding of unfamiliar letter strings. However, studies on healthy participants have produced contrasting results. The aim of this study was to investigate how the allocation of spatial attention may influence the perception of letter strings in skilled readers. High frequency words (HFWs), low frequency words and pseudowords were briefly and parafoveally presented either in the left or the right visual field. Attentional allocation was modulated by the presentation of a spatial cue before the target string. Accuracy in reporting the target string was modulated by the spatial cue but this effect varied with the type of string. For unfamiliar strings, processing was facilitated when attention was focused on the string location and hindered when it was diverted from the target. This finding is consistent the assumptions of the CDP+ model of reading aloud, as well as with familiarity sensitivity models that argue for a flexible use of attention according with the specific requirements of the string. Moreover, we found that processing of HFWs was facilitated by an extra-large focus of attention. The latter result is consistent with the hypothesis that a broad distribution of attention is the default mode during reading of familiar words because it might optimally engage the broad receptive fields of the highest detectors in the hierarchical system for visual word recognition.

show abstract

Is lexical access autonomous? Evidence from combining overlapping tasks with recording event-related brain potentials

Cited by 23 publications

References 67 publications

Backward compatibility effects in younger and older adults

Backward compatibility effects in younger and older adults

ERP Characterization of Sustained Attention Effects in Visual Lexical Categorization

Spatial attention in written word perception

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About