The Effects of Distractor Words on Naming Pictures at the Subordinate Level

Abstract

Three experiments are reported in which participants are asked to name pictures at the subordinate level (e.g. POODLE) whilst ignoring a distractor word. In Experiment 1, the distractor words included the names of other exemplars from the same basic-level category (e.g. spaniel). Naming latencies were prolonged in this condition, relative to unrelated conditions. In Experiment 2, the distractor words included the correct basic level names (e.g. dog) and the names of related basic level objects (e.g. cat). Subordinate naming latencies were faster in these conditions than in unrelated conditions, suggesting that basic level names can be eliminated as competitors and that it can even be useful to have simultaneous activation of the correct basic level representation when retrieving subordinate names. Finally, Experiment 3 showed that when the names of subordinate objects from a related basic-level category (e.g. koala) are printed on objects, subordinate naming latencies are again delayed when compared with unrelated conditions. The results are discussed with reference to current models of object name retrieval.

Context Effects on Lexical Choice and Lexical Activation.

“…In all experiments using distractors related to an alternative name from a different level of specificity than the target name, we observed inhibitory effects. There are only a few studies that have also explored between-level competition effects, and these studies used distractors denoting an alternative object name from a different level of specificity rather than a word phonologically similar to the alternative name, as was used in the present study (e.g., Glaser & Düngelhoff, 1984;Hantsch et al, in press;Kuijpers & La Heij, 2004;Roelofs, 1992;Vitkovitch & Tyrell, 1999;Zwitserlood et al, 2004). Results from the studies focusing on possible competition effects between basic-level names and subordinate-level names are mixed.…”

“…Results from the studies focusing on possible competition effects between basic-level names and subordinate-level names are mixed. Roelofs (1992) found facilitation from subordinate-level distractors during basic-level object naming, and Vitkovitch and Tyrell (1999) the latter two studies. Here, we do not provide a full discussion of possible reasons for the conflicting results in the aforementioned studies because the present study was concerned with potential context modulations of competition effects rather than the direction such competition effects take.…”

“…Most extant studies have focused on basic-level naming and the question of whether category coordinates (e.g., train, if car is the target name) are lexically activated and compete for selection. Only occasionally has naming at different levels of specificity been contrasted (e.g., Glaser & Düngelhoff, 1984;Hantsch, Jescheniak, & Schriefers, in press;Kuijpers & La Heij, 2004;Roelofs, 1992;Vitkovitch & Tyrell, 1999;Zwitserlood, Bölte, & Dohmes, 2004). Moreover, none of these studies has addressed the questions of whether activation of name alternatives from a different hierarchical level extends to lexical phonological representations and/or whether manipulation of the context in which a target object appears has an impact on the activation pattern.…”

Semantic competition between hierarchically related words during speech planning

“…The main conclusion is that the only two existing studies of such between-levels effects during picture naming provide evidence that appears to contradict the predictions that can be derived from current theories of picture naming and speech production. Both studies report semantic facilitation for betweenlevels distractors, yet they also show a divergence in that the study by Vitkovitch and Tyrrell (1999) replicated the standard within-level interference effect for basic-level naming and extended it to subordinate-level naming, whereas Roelofs (1992) reported facilitative effects also for within-level distractors.…”

“…We will now briefly review these studies. Vitkovitch and Tyrrell (1999) compared between-levels and within-level semantic competition effects using the picture-word paradigm. Their study replicated the within-level interference effect for basiclevel naming (e.g., target, snake; distractor, lizard) and extended this finding to subordinate-level naming (e.g., target, cobra; distractor, adder).…”