Superset versus substitution-letter priming: An evaluation of open-bigram models.

Lupker, Stephen J.; Zhang, Yu Ji; Perry, Jason R.; Davis, Colin J.

doi:10.1037/a0038392

Cited by 17 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There have now been a number of attempts to adjudicate between these families of models (e.g., Lupker & Davis, 2008;Lupker, Zhang, Perry, & Davis, 2015;Whitney, Bertrand, & Grainger, 2012). Most have involved the masked priming paradigm (Forster & Davis, 1984) along with the lexical decision task with the question being, does the pattern of priming effects observed more closely mirror the predictions of the noisy representation models or open bigram models?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Non-cognate translation priming effects in the same–different task: evidence for the impact of “higher level” information

Lupker

Perea

Nakayama

2015

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Norris and colleagues have proposed that priming effects observed in the masked prime same-different task are based solely on pre-lexical orthographic information. This proposal was evaluated by examining translation priming effects from non-cognate translation equivalents using both Spanish-English and Japanese-English bilinguals in the same-different task. Although no priming was observed for Spanish-English bilinguals, who also produced very little translation priming in a lexical decision task, significant priming was observed for Japanese-English bilinguals. These results indicate that, although most of the priming in the same-different task has an orthographic basis, other types of priming effects can emerge. Therefore, while the masked prime same-different task provides a good way of investigating the nature of orthographic coding, it, like the sandwich priming technique, can also be influenced by higher level information.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At present, we know of only one comparison of the sandwich priming, lexical decision task and the masked prime same-different task (Lupker et al, 2015). In those experiments, three different types of orthographically related primes were used (that were not related to their targets either semantically or morphologically).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-cognate translation priming effects in the same–different task: evidence for the impact of “higher level” information

Lupker

Perea

Nakayama

2015

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The SCM is a localist model of visual word recognition that can simulate a broad range of findings in visual word recognition (e.g., Davis, 2010;Lupker, Zhang, Perry, & Davis, 2015;Stinchcombe, Lupker, & Davis, 2012). Published simulations of the model have used a vocabulary of 30,605 English words, comprising all words of between two and ten letters with frequencies of occurrence of greater than 0.34 per million in the Celex English Corpus Types corpus (Baayen, Piepenbrock, & van Rijn, 1995).…”

Section: Simulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing single-unit recordings taken from a localist model to single-cell recording data: a good match

Gubian

Davis

Adelman

et al. 2016

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

University of Bristol -Explore Bristol Research General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. M.Gubian , e-mail: mm14722@bristol.ac.uk Abstract Single-cell recording studies show that some neurons respond to complex visual information (e.g., words, objects, faces) in a highly selective manner, with individual neurons responding to about .5% of presented images. Such data have often been taken as inconsistent with "grandmother cell" theories as well as with localist models in psychology. In particular, it is commonly assumed that units in localist models respond to only one input, resulting in greater levels of selectivity than seen in single-cell results. To test this assumption, we recorded unit activity from a localist model of word identification. Our results show that the model can capture the levels of selectivity reported in neuroscience. Accordingly, single-cell data do not rule out localist coding schemes. We propose that the term grandmother cell should be reserved for the hypothesis that the brain implements localist representations: neurons that represent one and only one thing but respond to multiple things.2

show abstract

“…For these reasons, the sandwich priming procedure has already been employed in several studies researching orthographic processes so far (e.g. Ktori, Grainger, Dufau, & Holcomb, 2012;Ktori, Kingma, Hannagan, Holcomb, & Grainger, 2014;Lupker, Zhang, Perry, & Davis, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The sandwich priming paradigm does not reduce lexical competitor effects.

Trifonova

Adelman

2018

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated the mechanisms underlying sandwich priming, a procedure in which a brief preprime target presentation precedes the conventional mask-prime-target sequence, used to study orthographic similarity. Lupker and Davis (2009) showed the sandwich paradigm enhances orthographic priming effects: With primes moderately related to targets, sandwich priming produced significant facilitation, but conventional priming did not. They argued that unlike conventional priming, sandwich priming is not susceptible to an uncontrolled counteractive inhibitory process, lexical competition, that cancels out moderate facilitation effects. They suggest lexical competition is eliminated by preactivating the target's representation, privileging the target over similar lexical units (competitors). As such, it better measures orthographic relatedness between primes and targets, a key purpose of many priming studies. We tested whether elimination of lexical competition could indeed account for the observed orthographic priming boost with sandwich priming. In three lexical decision experiments and accompanying simulations with a competitive network model, we compared priming effects in three preprime procedures: no preprime (conventional), identity (target) preprime (sandwich), and competitor preprime (included to exacerbate lexical competition). The related prime conditions consisted of replaced-letters, shared neighbor (one-letter-different from both competitor preprime and target), and transposed-all-letter nonword primes. Contrary to the model's predictions, the competitor preprime did not attenuate (Experiment 1) or even reverse the priming effect (Experiment 2). Moreover, the competitor enabled facilitatory priming that was absent with no preprime (Experiment 3). These data suggested that the sandwich orthographic boost could not be attributed to reduced lexical competition but rather to prelexical processes in word recognition. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

show abstract

Superset versus substitution-letter priming: An evaluation of open-bigram models.

Cited by 17 publications

References 46 publications

Non-cognate translation priming effects in the same–different task: evidence for the impact of “higher level” information

Non-cognate translation priming effects in the same–different task: evidence for the impact of “higher level” information

Comparing single-unit recordings taken from a localist model to single-cell recording data: a good match

The sandwich priming paradigm does not reduce lexical competitor effects.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About