Lexical and sentence context effects in word recognition.

Simpson, Greg B.; Peterson, R. R.; Casteel, Mark A.; Burgess, Curt

doi:10.1037/0278-7393.15.1.88

Cited by 114 publications

(115 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

102

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additional evidence against word-based priming has been provided by other researchers (e.g., Dopkins et aI., 1992;Foss, 1982;Foss & Speer, 1991;O'Seaghdha, 1989O'Seaghdha, , 1991Simpson, Peterson, Casteel, & Burgess, 1989). In particular, Foss demonstrated that detection ofa phoneme was facilitated in related versus neutral sentence contexts, but this difference was eliminated when the contexts were scrambled, even though the scrambled related context contained two associates preceding the targets and the adjacency of the associates and targets was maintained.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Sources of sentence constraint on lexical ambiguity resolution

Kellas

Paul

1998

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results from a series of naming experiments demonstrated that major lexical categories of simple sentences can provide sources of constraint on the interpretation of ambiguous words (homonyms). Manipulation of verb (Experiment 1) or subject noun (Experiment 2) specificity produced contexts that were empirically rated as being strongly biased or ambiguous. Priming was demonstrated for target words related to both senses of a homonym following ambiguous sentences, but only contextually appropriate target words were primed following strongly biased dominant or subordinate sentences. Experiment 3 showed an increase in the magnitude of priming when multiple constraints on activation converged. Experiments 4 and 5 eliminated combinatorial intralexical priming as an alternative explanation. Instead, it was demonstrated that each constraint was influential only insofar as it contributed to the overall semantic representation of the sentence. When the multiple sources of constraint were retained but the sentence-level representation was changed (Experiment 4) or eliminated (Experiment 5), the results of Experiments 1, 2, and 3 and were not replicated. Experiment 6 examined the issue of homonym exposure duration by using an 80-msec stimulus onset asynchrony. The results replicated the previous experiments. The overall evidence indicates that a sentence context can be made strongly and immediately constraining by the inclusion of specific fillers for salient lexical categories. The results are discussed within a constraint-based, context-sensitive model of lexical ambiguity resolution.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Sources of sentence constraint on lexical ambiguity resolution

Kellas

Paul

1998

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies have analysed both semantic (e.g., Duffy, Henderson, & Morris, 1989;O'Seaghdha, 1989O'Seaghdha, , 1997Simpson, Peterson, Casteel, & Burgess, 1989;Williams, 1988) and syntactic (e.g., West & Stanovich, 1986) level context effects, generally concluding that syntactic primes lead mainly to inhibition but no facilitation, because they affect processes that occur after word access, whereas semantic priming is mainly facilitative, caused by lexical level word associations-e.g., dog primes cat, because they are associated words in the lexicon or co-occur frequently in the language (see Lucas, 1999;O'Seaghdha, 1997). In agreement with these studies, gender priming that leads to inhibitory syntactic effects has been reported in Italian using auditory gender monitoring (also called gender classification; Bates et al, 1996) and in German using visual lexical decision (Friederici & Schriefers, 1994;Schriefers, Friederici, & Rose, 1998) and cross-modal visual word naming (Friederici, Garrett, & Jacobsen, 1999 for an overview of the effects of gender in comprehension and production tasks; Jacobsen, 1999; see Schriefers & Jescheniak, 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When zebras become painted donkeys: Grammatical gender and semantic priming interact during picture integration in a spoken Spanish sentence

Wicha

Orozco-Figueroa

Reyes

et al. 2005

Language and Cognitive Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the contribution of grammatical gender to integrating depicted nouns into sentences during on-line comprehension, and whether semantic congruity and gender agreement interact using two tasks: naming and semantic judgement of pictures. Native Spanish speakers comprehended spoken Spanish sentences with an embedded line drawing, which replaced a noun that either made sense or not with the preceding sentence context and either matched or mismatched the gender of the preceding article. In Experiment 1a (picture naming) slower naming times were found for gender mismatching pictures than matches, as well as for semantically incongruous pictures than congruous ones. In addition, the effects of gender agreement and semantic congruity interacted; specifically, pictures that were both semantically incongruous and gender mismatching were named slowest, but not as slow as if adding independent delays from both violations. Compared with a neutral baseline, with pictures embedded in simple command sentences like "Now please say ____", both facilitative and inhibitory effects were observed. Experiment 1b replicated these results with low-cloze gender-neutral sentences, more similar in structure and processing demands to the experimental sentences. In Experiment 2, participants judged a picture's semantic fit within a sentence by button-press; gender agreement and semantic congruity again interacted, with gender agreement having an effect on congruous but not incongruous pictures. Two distinct effects of gender are hypothesised: a "global" predictive effect (observed with and without overt noun production), and a "local" inhibitory effect (observed only with production of gender-discordant nouns).

show abstract

“…Simpson et al (1989) demonstrated that sentence effects in a word-naming task were not simply a result of activation of the sentence structure, but ofthe sentence meaning. In the present study, the fact that sentences were processed primarily when they included task-relevant words suggests that it was the meaning and not simply the structure of the sentences that received processing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Likewise, lexical decisions are made more quickly when target words are preceded by semantically related primes (e.g., Sereno, 1991). Further, word recognition is enhanced when words occur in the context of meaningful phrases (e.g., O'Seaghdha, 1989) or sentences (e.g., Hess, Foss, & Carroll, 1995;Masson, 1986;Simpson, Peterson, Casteel, & Burgess, 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sentence interference in the Stroop task

Brega

Healy

1999

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In two experiments on Stroop interference, we examined whether sentences can be processed without the intention of the reader. Participants named the ink colors in which words in sentences were printed, and the ink colors in which the same words, randomly arranged, were printed. In Experiment 1, sentences yielded longer response times (RTs) and more errors than did nonsentences, but only when they included words that were highly relevant to the color-naming task (i.e., color and color-related words). In Experiment 2, sentences yielded more errors than did nonsentences, and sentences in which the color words matched the set of ink colors yielded longer RTs than did nonsentences. The results indicate that sentence processing can be obligatory when the component words are highly relevant to the task.In 1935, 1. R. Stroop reported a series of experiments that precipitated an explosion of research into what has since been called the Stroop effect. Stroop found that participants took significantly longer to name the ink colors in which incongruent color words were printed than to name the ink colors in which color squares were printed (Experiment 2). Words caused interference in the co10r-naming task.According to some explanations of the Stroop effect, individuals are so experienced at word reading that they do it without intention (e.g., Posner & Snyder, 1975). More recent accounts suggest that the interference evident in the Stroop task is due to vast differences in the relative strengths ofprocessing associated with word reading and color naming (Cohen, Dunbar, & McClelland, 1990). Processing strength results directly from practice and determines the level of attention that a process requires, the speed with which it can occur, and the interference effects that will emerge in dual-task situations. Word reading is a task practiced frequently; it occurs quickly and requires little attention. Color naming, on the other hand, is a task practiced less often; it therefore requires more time and conscious attention than does word reading.Because the word-reading and color-naming processes both rely on a common resource (i.e., a verbal response at the output stage), the Stroop task promotes response Earlier versions of this report were presented at the meeting of the Rocky Mountain

show abstract

Lexical and sentence context effects in word recognition.

Abstract: We are grateful to George Kellas and Paula Schwanenflugel for their comments on earlier drafts.

Cited by 114 publications

References 47 publications

Sources of sentence constraint on lexical ambiguity resolution

Sources of sentence constraint on lexical ambiguity resolution

When zebras become painted donkeys: Grammatical gender and semantic priming interact during picture integration in a spoken Spanish sentence

Sentence interference in the Stroop task

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About