The Influence of Working Memory Load on Semantic Priming

Abstract

The present research examines the nature of the different processes that have been proposed to underlie semantic priming. Specifically, it has been argued that priming arises as a result of automatic target activation and/or the use of strategies like prospective expectancy generation and retrospective semantic matching. This article investigates the extent that these processes rely on cognitive resources by experimentally manipulating working memory load. To disentangle prospective and retrospective processes, prime-target pairs were selected such that they were symmetrically associated (e.g., answer-question; SYM) or asymmetrically associated in either the forward direction (e.g., panda-bear; FA) or the backward direction (e.g., ball-catch; BA). The results showed that priming for FA pairs completely evaporated under a high working memory load, but that it remained stable for BA and SYM pairs. This was taken to mean that prospective processes, which are assumed to cause FA priming, require cognitive resources, whereas retrospective processes, which lead to BA priming, are relatively effortless.

Meaning and words in the conference interpreter’s mind

“…With longer SOA, participants are believed to apply various strategies (Perea & Rosa 2002), one of which, the expectancy generation, is of vital importance for the present study. This mechanism involves the mental construction of a list of words related to the prime before the appearance of the target (Heyman et al 2015;McNamara 2005;. When applied in a cross-linguistic priming task, such as the one in the present study, a long SOA "may allow participants to translate the prime into Since the present study focuses on the differences between groups more and less experienced in interpreting I decided to use the SOA of 750 ms. As mentioned earlier, effects found with a longer SOA may reflect strategic processing involving expectancy mechanism.…”

Semantic feature dissociation: A new hypothesis concerning autism

“…Autistic participants were more likely to look at the target image, even though HAMSTER is not reliably predicted by the context. On standard accounts, however, contextual priming only requires some relevant knowledge to be activated (Heyman et. al., 2015).…”

Lexical Access Patterns of Second Language Speakers of English

“…The present study focuses on the patterns of ESL speakers' manner of accessing words in their minds when they need the word. Known as Lexical Access (or lexical retrieval) (Duñabeitia & Molinaro, 2013;Field, 2003), this study relies on the Semantic Priming phenomenon, which refers to an observation that the response to a target (e.g., dog) is facilitated when it is preceded by a semantically related prime (e.g., cat) compared with when the prime is unrelated (e.g., car) (Heyman, Rensbergen, Storms, Hutchison & De Deyne, 2014). Most semantic priming is explained using the speed or accuracy of words reflected in responding to a stimulus of a word or a picture that is being primed (Heyman et al, 2014;Khairudin, Valipour & Zainah, 2012).…”

“…Known as Lexical Access (or lexical retrieval) (Duñabeitia & Molinaro, 2013;Field, 2003), this study relies on the Semantic Priming phenomenon, which refers to an observation that the response to a target (e.g., dog) is facilitated when it is preceded by a semantically related prime (e.g., cat) compared with when the prime is unrelated (e.g., car) (Heyman, Rensbergen, Storms, Hutchison & De Deyne, 2014). Most semantic priming is explained using the speed or accuracy of words reflected in responding to a stimulus of a word or a picture that is being primed (Heyman et al, 2014;Khairudin, Valipour & Zainah, 2012). For example, when participants are given a word and are asked to select a word that comes across his/her mind, the response times for the related prime-target pairs (e.g., doctor-nurse) are expected to be fast and the accuracy is expected to be higher than the non-target pairs (e.g., doctor-apple) (Heyman et al, 2014).…”

“…Most semantic priming is explained using the speed or accuracy of words reflected in responding to a stimulus of a word or a picture that is being primed (Heyman et al, 2014;Khairudin, Valipour & Zainah, 2012). For example, when participants are given a word and are asked to select a word that comes across his/her mind, the response times for the related prime-target pairs (e.g., doctor-nurse) are expected to be fast and the accuracy is expected to be higher than the non-target pairs (e.g., doctor-apple) (Heyman et al, 2014).…”