Semantic facilitation across sensory modalities in the processing of individual words and sentences

Swinney, David; Onifer, William; Prather, Penny; Hirshkowitz, Max

doi:10.3758/bf03197534

Cited by 197 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Primes in isolation produced robust facilitation (e.g., Andruski, Blumstein, & Burton, 1994;Bölte & Coenen, 2002;Marslen-Wilson & Zwitserlood, 1989;Swinney, Onifer, Prather, & Hirshkowitz, 1979;Williams, 1988). Primes in sentences on the other hand have not always been so reliable.…”

Section: Cross-modal Associative Primingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Primes in sentences on the other hand have not always been so reliable. Swinney et al (1979) and Lucas (1987) and Shillcock (1982Shillcock ( , 1990 were among those who reported signiWcant associative priming eVects in sentences. The Wrst failures of cross-modal associative priming in sentence contexts were reported by Williams (1988) and Tabossi (1988a).…”

Section: Cross-modal Associative Primingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Phonological and conceptual activation in speech comprehension

Norris

Cutler

McQueen

et al. 2006

Cognitive Psychology

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

, who originated the cross-modal priming task and thus signiWcantly furthered the study of spoken-language processing, died in April 2006. This paper is dedicated to his memory. AbstractWe propose that speech comprehension involves the activation of token representations of the phonological forms of current lexical hypotheses, separately from the ongoing construction of a conceptual interpretation of the current utterance. In a series of cross-modal priming experiments, facilitation of lexical decision responses to visual target words (e.g., time) was found for targets that were semantic associates of auditory prime words (e.g., date) when the primes were isolated words, but not when the same primes appeared in sentence contexts. Identity priming (e.g., faster lexical decisions to visual date after spoken date than after an unrelated prime) appeared, however, both with isolated primes and with primes in prosodically neutral sentences. Associative priming in sentence contexts only emerged when sentence prosody involved contrastive accents, or when sentences were terminated immediately after the prime. Associative priming is therefore not an automatic consequence of speech processing. In no experiment was there associative priming from embedded words (e.g., sedate-time), but there was inhibitory identity priming (e.g., sedate-date) from embedded primes in sentence contexts. Speech comprehension therefore appears to involve separate distinct activation both of token phonological word representations and of conceptual word representations. Furthermore, both of these types of representation are distinct from the long-term memory representations of word form and meaning.

show abstract

Section: Cross-modal Associative Primingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cross-modal Associative Primingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonological and conceptual activation in speech comprehension

Norris

Cutler

McQueen

et al. 2006

Cognitive Psychology

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cross-modal priming of lexical decision responses is a wellestablished method for probing the activation of potentially ambiguous sequences (Gow & Gordon, 1995;Swinney et al, 1979). Target words are commonly semantically or associatively related to the meaning of the prime word (see, e.g., Luce & Cluff, 1998;Moss & Marslen-Wilson, 1993;Shillcock, 1990;Zwitserlood, 1989;Zwitserlood & Shriefers, 1995;see Tabossi, 1996, for a review).…”

Section: Experiments 2: Cross-modal Primingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leading up the lexical garden path: Segmentation and ambiguity in spoken word recognition.

Davis¹,

Marslen–Wilson²,

Gaskell³

2002

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception &Amp; Performance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…On the one hand, spoken word recognition has been investigated using tasks such as cross-modal semantic priming (e.g., Swinney et al 1979;Warren 1972), auditory lexical decision (e.g., McCusker, Hillinger, and Bias 1981), speech shadowing (e.g., Cherry 1957;Marslen-Wilson 1973), phoneme monitoring (e.g., Foss 1969;Frauenfelder and Segui 1989), gating (e.g., Grosjean 1980), and word spotting (e.g., Cutler and Norris 1988). Furthermore, research has used eye-tracking techniques to monitor participants' eyemovements as they follow spoken instructions to manipulate real objects (e.g., Tanenhaus et al 1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%