Weak contextual constraints in text and word priming

Sharkey, Amanda J. C.; Sharkey, Noel

doi:10.1016/0749-596x(92)90028-v

Cited by 109 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Contrary to Sharkey and Sharkey (1992), we found that a word in a sentence facilitated response time on an immediately following test of an associated word. Our result, unlike Sharkey and Sharkey's, is consistent with current models of the processing of relations among words.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

“…For example, if a sentence contains the word boy, the relation between boy and girl should be immediately available. Sharkey and Sharkey (1992) From most theoretical viewpoints, our result is not surprising. That is, it is not surprising that the explicit mention of a word should lead to facilitation of associates of the word.…”

Section: Testing Theories Of Language Processingmentioning

confidence: 49%

“…It would be expected that a lexical decision test of snow immediately following the sentence fragment ... he skier would result in facilitation of response time to snow, and this is what we found. Although Sharkey and Sharkey (1992) recently failed to find immediate facilitation, their result may well be anomalous. The variance among response times in their experiment appears to have been high (as mentioned above), and their failure is inconsistent not only with the results described here but also with a considerable amount of previous…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…Sharkey and Sharkey's (1992) result from on-line lexical decision stands virtually alone as data contradicting major mooels designed to account for relations among the meanings of words (Anderson, 1983;Dosher & Roseda'" 1989;Kintsch, 1988;. These models accommodate large ranges of other kinds of data.…”

Section: Testing Theories Of Language Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…JANET, and JULIA HIRSCHBERG. 1990 Sharkey and Sharkey (1992) found that a word in a sentence did not give faci.itation to an immediately following, highly associated test item. We show in this article that such facilitation can be obtained.…”

Section: Msmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Reading: Interaction With Memory

McKoon¹

1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public"~~fI" bu dn ~or this coIIwctie, of intaknq0 #6 99Mdttd to average r~II.i bILew~a IP to wsdrohe~ e,,n dogs ,.ues. Available to general pub ?AProvedIfor public release disti-ibuat ion unlimited. AVISTRACT (Maximum ZOO wo*dsThe topic of the supported research was reading, and the ways information in memory can contribute to the inference processes *t-hat occur during reading. One source of information for inference processes is short-term memory for parts of a text that have already been read. Experiments investigated how this information is made available to allow, for example, inferences that decide the correct referent of a pronoun, or inferences that relate via causality two events described by the text. Experiments also examined the local representation constructed for a text, testing our proposal that locally available informat 4 .or is structured by the linguistic, semantic, and pragmatic means by which the information is expressed. A second line of research examined interactions between inference processes and well-known information from longterm memory, examining knowledge of the semantic structures of verbs, knowledge of what concepts are frequently associated with each other, and knowledge about how lexical items are used in various contexts. It. SUBJECT TERMS NUMBER OF PAGES2

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

Section: Testing Theories Of Language Processingmentioning

confidence: 49%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Testing Theories Of Language Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Msmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Reading: Interaction With Memory

McKoon¹

1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Semantic Memory and Priming

McNamara

Holbrook

2003

Handbook of Psychology

156

194

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this chapter is to review theoretical and empirical developments in the scientific understanding of semantic memory, semantic priming, and repetition priming. We begin by summarizing the classical models of semantic memory and the major empirical findings that were used to test those models. We also summarize two contemporary models of semantic memory, distributed network models and high‐dimensional spatial models. In the second section of the chapter, we examine semantic priming. We review the most influential models of semantic priming; viz., spreading‐activation, compound‐cue, and distributed‐network models. We then summarize the major empirical findings on semantic priming, focusing in particular on issues that have turned out to be important for testing models of semantic priming and on findings published since Neely's (1991) review. In the third section, we examine repetition priming. We summarize the most influential models of repetition priming, such as the logogen model, the counter model, instance theory, and distributed network models. We then review some of the major issues and findings on repetition priming. We close the chapter with a summary of our conclusions and a discussion of promising directions for future research.

show abstract

Semantic Memory and PrimingI am grateful to David Balota, Derek Besner, Dorothee Chwilla, Alice Healy, Jon Holbrook, Steve Joordens, Margery Lucas, Ken McRae, James Neely, David Plaut, Robert Proctor, and Irving Weiner for their comments on sections or drafts of this chapter or its earlier edition.

McNamara

2012

Handbook of Psychology, Second Edition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Weak contextual constraints in text and word priming

Cited by 109 publications

References 51 publications

Reading: Interaction With Memory

Reading: Interaction With Memory

Semantic Memory and Priming

Semantic Memory and PrimingI am grateful to David Balota, Derek Besner, Dorothee Chwilla, Alice Healy, Jon Holbrook, Steve Joordens, Margery Lucas, Ken McRae, James Neely, David Plaut, Robert Proctor, and Irving Weiner for their comments on sections or drafts of this chapter or its earlier edition.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About