Dissociated backward priming effects in lexical decision and pronunciation tasks

Abstract

Backward priming was examined at 150-and 500-msec prime-target stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) using visually presented primes and targets in lexical decision and pronunciation tasks. Two kinds of backward relations were used: compound items for which targets and primes formed a word in the backward direction (e.g., prime: HOP; target: bell), and noncompound items for which targets and primes did not form a word but were associatively related in the backward but not the forward direction (e.g., prime: BABY;target: stork). Results showed that backward priming effects were equivalent for compounds and noncompounds. However, for lexical decisions, backward priming occurred at both SOAs, whereas for pronunciation, it occurred only at the 150-msec SOA. We discuss how this SOAdissociated backward priming effect in lexical decision and pronunciation tasks poses a serious challenge for all theories of semantic priming.Numerous studies have examined how a single-word semantic context (called the prime) can affect the processing ofa following target letter string (see Neely, 1991, for a review). To allow control over the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between the prime and target, in most semantic priming experiments no overt response is required to the prime and the person's task is either to make a lexical (word/nonword) decision to the target or to pronounce it aloud, as quickly as possible. The finding that reaction times (RTs) to a target are faster when it follows a semantically or associatively related prime than when it follows an unrelated prime is referred to as semantic priming.

The effect of asymmetrical association on positive and negative semantic priming

“…Contrary to episodic retrieval, retrospective semantic matching is most often thought to reflect a strategic process with backward priming effects often used as markers of such a strategy (Kahan et al, 1999;Neely, 1991;Peterson & Simpson, 1989;Seidenberg, Waters, Sanders, & Langer, 1984;Shelton & Martin, 1992). The absence of backward priming in the present experiment therefore suggests that the participants were not engaged in this process.…”

“…The data are reported from 40 critical asymmetrically associated noncompound word pairs (e.g., dentist-pain) taken from Kahan et al (1999), Peterson and Simpson (1989), and Thompson-Schill, Kurtz, and Gabrieli (1998). The University of South Florida Word Association Norms (Nelson, McEvoy, & Schreiber, 1989) were used to select word pairs from these studies that contained a strong forward association (mean forward association = .26) yet little to no backward association (mean backward association = .01).…”

“…1 This finding has been replicated by several researchers using the standard LDT when the prime-to-target stimulus-onset asynchrony (SOA) is 500 msec or greater. (See Kahan, Neely, & Forsythe, 1999, for a review.) However, with similar SOAs in a pronunciation task that yields forward semantic PP, backward PP does not occur (see Kahan et al, 1999).…”

“…(See Kahan, Neely, & Forsythe, 1999, for a review.) However, with similar SOAs in a pronunciation task that yields forward semantic PP, backward PP does not occur (see Kahan et al, 1999). Nor does it occur in a continuousLDT procedure in which participantsrespond to both prime and target stimuli (Shelton & Martin, 1992).…”

The semantic priming project

“…Woolsey, 1997), (2) prime or target visibility (Balota, 1983;Balota, Yap, Cortese, & Watson, 2008;Kiefer & Martens, 2010;Stolz & Neely, 1995;Thomas, Neely, & O'Connor, 2012), (3) response tasks (Hutchison, Balota, Cortese, & Watson, 2008;Kahan, Neely, & Forsythe, 1999;Pecher, Zeelenberg, &Raaijmakers, 1998), (4) prime-target relation type (Chiarello, Burgess, Richards, & Pollock, 1990;Hodgson, 1991;Moss, Ostrin, Tyler, & Marslen-Wilson, 1995), and (5) developmental or individual differences (Balota & Duchek, 1988;Moritz, Woodward, Küppers, Lausen, & Schickel, 2003;Plaut & Booth, 2000;Stanovich & West, 1979). Interactions within such factorial designs have provided the foundation for developing theories of semantic organization of knowledge and memory retrieval.…”