Masked priming for prefixed words with bound stems: Does submit prime permit?

Forster, Kenneth I.; Azuma, Tamiko

doi:10.1080/01690960050119698

Cited by 57 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Typically, it is difficult to observe semantic (e.g., craft-ART) facilitation when primes are forward masked and prime durations are as short as 50 ms in the lexical decision task (Forster, Mohan, & Hector, 2003;Rastle, Davis, Marslen-Wilson, & Tyler, 2000), although some have obtained it under exceptional conditions (see Perea & Gotor, 1997). Morphological (e.g., artist-ART) facilitation, however, is robust and easy to detect (Forster & Azuma, 2000;Forster, Davis, Schoknecht, & Carter, 1987;Grainger, Colé, & Segui, 1991;Pastizzo & Feldman, 2002;Rastle et al, 2000). Effects when orthographically similar primes are forward masked (e.g., artery-ART) are inconsistent.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

List context fosters semantic processing: Parallels between semantic and morphological facilitation when primes are forward masked.

Feldman¹,

Basnight-Brown²

2008

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors examined patterns of facilitation under forward-masked priming conditions across 3 list contexts (Experiments 1-3) that varied with respect to properties of filler trials-(a) mixed (morphological, orthographic, semantic), (b) identity, and (c) semantic-but held the relatedness proportion constant (75%). Facilitation for targets that were related morphologically to their prime occurred regardless of filler context, but facilitation for semantically related pairs occurred only in the context of identity and semantic fillers. Facilitation was absent for orthographically similar prime-target pairs in all 3 filler contexts when matching numbers of orthographically similar wordword and word-nonword prime-target pairs rendered orthographic similarity uninformative with respect to lexicality of the target. Enhanced semantic and morphological facilitation in the context of identity and semantic relative to mixed fillers support a semantically attuned, as contrasted with a purely form-based, account of early morphological processing. Keywordsforward-masked primes; semantic priming; morphological priming; prime validity; prime recruitment When primes are forward masked and appear for durations on the order of 50 ms or less, readers generally are unaware of their presentation. Nonetheless, various dimensions of similarity between forward-masked primes and their targets differentially influence this early phase of target recognition. Typically, it is difficult to observe semantic (e.g., craft-ART) facilitation when primes are forward masked and prime durations are as short as 50 ms in the lexical decision task (Forster, Mohan, & Hector, 2003;Rastle, Davis, Marslen-Wilson, & Tyler, 2000), although some have obtained it under exceptional conditions (see Perea & Gotor, 1997). Morphological (e.g., artist-ART) facilitation, however, is robust and easy to detect (Forster & Azuma, 2000;Forster, Davis, Schoknecht, & Carter, 1987;Grainger, Colé, & Segui, 1991;Pastizzo & Feldman, 2002;Rastle et al., 2000). Effects when orthographically similar primes are forward masked (e.g., artery-ART) are inconsistent. Some have observed nonsignificant orthographic inhibition (Janack, Pastizzo, & Feldman, 2004;Pastizzo & Feldman, 2002;Pollatsek, Perea, & Binder, 1999;Sears, Hino, & Lupker, 1995), whereas others have observed facilitation (Carreiras, Perea, & Grainger, 1997;Forster & Shen, 1996;Forster & Taft, 1994 NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript effects seem to depend on lexicality of the prime (Siakaluk, Sears, & Lupker, 2002), relative prime-target length (De Moor & Brysbaert, 2000), relative prime-target frequency (Segui & Grainger, 1990), and properties of the target's orthographic neighborhood, including number of neighbors or density (Carreiras et al., 1997;Forster et al., 1987), number of higher frequency neighbors (Perea & Lupker, 2003), and number of shared neighbors between prime and target (Davis & Lupker, 2006).One interpretation of the failure to detect semantic facilitatio...

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

List context fosters semantic processing: Parallels between semantic and morphological facilitation when primes are forward masked.

Feldman¹,

Basnight-Brown²

2008

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Notably, all significant effects were found in response latencies, whereas accuracy scores seemed not to be affected by experimental manipulations. This is not a surprising finding, nor is it unprecedented in the literature, where responses to unrelated primes have typically been found to be numerically less accurate, but not always significantly so Rastle et al, 2004; but see also Diependaele et al, 2011;Forster & Azuma, 2000 for significant differences). The error data of our nonnative speakers is the most prototypical, with 3-4% less accuracy in the unrelated condition.…”

Section: Constituent Primingmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…When the overlap dimension was purely formal, no priming effects were observed (e.g., tinsel -TIN). In contrast, some studies have reported orthographic priming effects at short stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) under masked priming conditions (e.g., Chateau, Knudsen, & Jared, 2002;Forster & Azuma, 2000;Grainger, Granier, Farioli, Van Assche, & van Heuven, 2006). In three masked priming experiments manipulating prime duration, Forster and Azuma (2000) compared priming effects between a) prefixed words sharing a bound stem (submit -PERMIT), b) a prefixed word and its free stem (fold -UNFOLD), and c) unrelated words sharing their (non-morphological) final graphemes (shallow -FOLLOW).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Masked constituent priming of English compounds in native and non-native speakers

Alonso

Castellanos

Müller

2016

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present research explores the degree of morphological structure of compound words in the native and nonnative lexicons, and provides additional data on the access to these representations. Native and nonnative speakers (L1 Spanish) of English were tested using a lexical decision task with masked priming of the compound's constituents in isolation, including two orthographic conditions to control for a potential orthographic locus of effects. Both groups displayed reliable priming effects, unmediated by semantics, for the morphological but not the orthographic conditions as compared to an unrelated baseline. Results contribute further evidence of morphological structure in the lexicon of native speakers, and suggest that lexical representation and access in a second language are qualitatively comparable at relatively advanced levels of proficiency.Keywords: lexical representation; non-native speakers; compounds; morphological processing; masked priming. IntroductionAmong the considerable issues in visual word recognition research, the role of morphology is hotly debated. While many agree that, at least in some cases, native visual word processing involves morphological decomposition for complex words (e.g., Marslen-Wilson, 2007), there is no consensus as to exactly how, when, and under what conditions this happens. As with any other aspect of language processing, access is crucially interesting for psycholinguists in that it is inextricably bound to representation.In fact, the existence of-or even the need for-a morphologically structured lexicon has been the subject of much discussion (see, e.g., Feldman, O'Connor, & Moscoso del Prado Martín, 2009). Focused on the visual processing of English compound words in isolation, the data reported in this article provide supporting evidence for models assuming some degree of morphological structure in the lexicon of native speakers, and suggests that lexical representations in relatively proficient second language users are equally complex.The role constituent morphemes play in the access to, and representation of, complex words has been explored systematically for the last 40 years, from the seminal studies of Forster, 1975, 1976) to the proliferation of research contrasting behavioural, electrophysiological, neuroimaging and clinical data (e.g., Bozic, Marslen-Wilson, Stamatakis, Davis, & Tyler, 2007;Fiorentino, Naito-billen, Bost, & Fund-Reznicek, 2014;MacGregor & Shtyrov, 2013;Marelli, Zonca, Contardi, & Luzzatti, 2014; Marslen-Wilson & Tyler, 2007, among others). Current positions range from models advocating exclusively morpheme mediated access (Stockall & Marantz, 2006;Taft & Nillsen, 2013), to dual/multiple-route accounts highlighting the competition (and/or cooperation) between whole-form and morpheme-based access (Hyönä, 2012), to proposals questioning the role of morphology in favour of a distributed-connectionist implementation of unmediated access to constituent and whole-word meanings through orthographic and/or phonological cues (e.g., Devlin, Jami...

show abstract

“…Evidence from word recognition (Kempley & Morton, 1982) and lexical decision experiments (Emmorey, 1989;Forster & Azuma, 2000;Laudanna, Badecker, & Caramazza, 1989, 1992Laudanna, Cermele, & Caramazza, 1997;Raveh & Rueckl, 2000) with adults suggests that the ability to recognise a target word is facilitated by a prime that shares its stem. A prime (e.g., harm) that contains the same stem as a target (harmless) speeds the recognition of the target word, whereas it inhibits the recognition of a phonologically related but morphologically unrelated target (harmony).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphological priming effects on children’s spelling

Rosa

Nuñes

2007

Read Writ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has suggested that children in the early grades of primary school do not have much awareness of morphemes. In this study, a priming paradigm was used to try to detect early signs of morphological representation of stems through a spelling task presented to Portuguese children (N = 805; age range 6-9 years). Primes shared the stem with the targets and contained well-articulated, stressed vowels; the stems of the target words and pseudo-words contained nonstressed schwa vowels, which typically result in spelling difficulties. If priming proved effective, the well-articulated vowels in the prime should result in an improvement in the spelling of the schwa vowels. Primes were presented in two conditions: in only-oral or in oral-plus-written form. Effectiveness of priming was assessed by comparison with a no-priming condition. For both words and pseudowords, there was a significant interaction between priming effects and grade. No priming effects were detected in 6-and 7-year-old children; oral-plus-written priming produced higher rates of correct vowel spelling for 8-and 9-year-olds; only-oral priming was effective in improving the vowel spelling of 9-year-olds. Thus older children can use morphological information under priming conditions when the prime and the target are not phonologically transparent but there is no evidence to suggest that younger children do so.

show abstract

Masked priming for prefixed words with bound stems: Does submit prime permit?

Cited by 57 publications

References 23 publications

List context fosters semantic processing: Parallels between semantic and morphological facilitation when primes are forward masked.

List context fosters semantic processing: Parallels between semantic and morphological facilitation when primes are forward masked.

Masked constituent priming of English compounds in native and non-native speakers

Morphological priming effects on children’s spelling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About