Reading involves a process of matching an orthographic input with stored representations in lexical memory. The masked priming paradigm has become a standard tool for investigating this process. Use of existing results from this paradigm can be limited by the precision of the data and the need for cross-experiment comparisons that lack normal experimental controls. Here, we present a single, large, high-precision, multi-condition experiment to address these problems. Over 1000 participants from 14 sites responded to 840 trials involving 28 different types of orthographically related primes (e.g., castfe-CASTLE) in a lexical decision task, as well as completing measures of spelling and vocabulary. The data 1.4.1 were indeed highly sensitive to differences between conditions: After correction for multiple comparisons, prime type condition differences of 2.90 ms and above reached significance at the 5% level. This paper presents the method of data collection and preliminary findings from these data, which included replications of the most widely agreed-upon differences between prime types, further evidence for systematic individual differences in susceptibility to priming, and new evidence regarding lexical properties associated with a target word's susceptibility to priming. These analyses will form a basis for the use of these data in quantitative model fitting and evaluation, and future exploration of these data that will inform and motivate new experiments.FORM PRIMING PROJECT 3

In interference tasks (e.g., Stroop, 1935), the difference between congruent and incongruent latencies (i.e., the “congruency” effect) is larger in trial blocks containing mostly congruent trials than in trial blocks containing mostly incongruent trials (the proportion-congruent [PC] effect). Although the PC effect has typically been interpreted as reflecting adjustments in attention toward/away from the task-irrelevant dimension (i.e., a conflict-adaptation strategy), recent research has suggested alternative accounts based on the learning of either contingencies (i.e., distractor-response associations) or of temporal expectancies (i.e., the typical response speed on previous trials), accounts in which conflict adaptation plays no role. Using the picture–word interference paradigm, we report data from two PC manipulations in which contingency learning was made impossible by using nonrepeated distractors (Experiment 1A) or both nonrepeated distractors and responses (Experiment 1B). The classic PC effect emerged in both experiments. In addition, learning of temporal expectancies could not explain the present PC effects either, as results from trial-level analyses of Experiments 1A and 1B and a nonconflict version of Experiment 1B (Experiment 2) were inconsistent with the predictions of the temporal learning account of PC effects. These results suggest that conflict adaptation remains a credible explanation for PC effects.

A consistent finding in the Stroop literature is that congruency effects (i.e., the color-naming latency difference between words presented in incongruent vs. congruent colors) are larger for mostly-congruent items (e.g., the word RED presented most often in red) than for mostly-incongruent items (e.g., the word GREEN presented most often in yellow). This "item-specific proportion-congruent effect" might be produced by a conflictadaptation process (e.g., fully focus attention to the color when the word GREEN appears) and/or by a more general learning mechanism of stimulus-response contingencies (e.g., respond "yellow" when the word GREEN appears). Under the assumption that limited-capacity resources are necessary for learning stimulusresponse contingencies, we examined the contingency-learning account using both Stroop and nonconflict (i.e., noncolor words written in colors) versions of a color identification task while participants maintained a working memory (WM) load. Consistent with the contingency-learning account, WM load modulated people's ability to learn contingencies in the nonconflict task. In contrast, across 3 experiments, WM load did not affect the item-specific proportion-congruent effect in the Stroop task even though we employed a design (the "2-item set" design) in which contingency learning should be the dominant process. These results imply that the item-specific proportion-congruent effect is not merely a byproduct of contingency learning but a manifestation of reactive control, a mode of control engagement that may be especially useful when WM resources are scarce.

Benign breast papillomas diagnosed by CNB have a low risk of malignancy and do not need excision. However, they should be considered high risk lesions which require serial radiographic monitoring. Papillomas associated with atypia or malignancy should continue to be excised.

In recent years, a number of models of orthographic coding have been proposed in which the orthographic code consists of a set of units representing bigrams (open-bigram models). Three masked priming experiments were undertaken in an attempt to evaluate this idea: a conventional masked priming experiment, a sandwich priming experiment (Lupker & Davis, 2009) and an experiment involving a masked prime same-different task (Norris & Kinoshita, 2008). Three prime types were used, first-letter superset primes (e.g., wjudge-JUDGE), last-letter superset primes (e.g., judgew-JUDGE) and standard substitution-letter primes (e.g., juwge-JUDGE). In none of the experiments was there any evidence that the superset primes were more effective primes, the prediction made by open-bigram models. In fact, in the second and third experiments, first-letter superset primes were significantly worse primes than the other two prime types. These results provide no evidence for the existence of open-bigram units. They also suggest that prime-target mismatches at the first position produce orthographic codes that are less similar than mismatches at other positions. Implications for models of orthographic coding are discussed.