Nonword Repetition Priming in Lexical Decision Reverses as a Function of Study Task and Speed Stress.

Abstract

The authors argue that nonword repetition priming in lexical decision is the net result of 2 opposing processes. First, repeating nonwords in the lexical decision task results in the storage of a memory trace containing the interpretation that the letter string is a nonword; retrieval of this trace leads to an increase in performance for repeated nonwords. Second, nonword repetition results in increased familiarity, making the nonword more "wordlike," leading to a decrease in performance. Consistent with this dual-process account, Experiment 1 showed a facilitatory effect for nonwords studied in a lexical decision task but an inhibitory effect for nonwords studied in a letter-height task. Experiment 2 showed inhibitory nonword repetition priming for participants tested under speed-stress instructions.

Dissociating the influence of familiarity and meaningfulness from word frequency in naming and lexical decision performance

“…However, when one only affords a change in the FM value, by changing the task across repetitions, then one finds inhibitory effects. Again, this is consistent with the results of Zeelenberg et al (2004) and Balota and Spieler (1999). Given the intriguing effects of repetition, this work has some intriguing implications for research on recognition memory performance, wherein distinctions between recollection and familiarity play a dominant role in memory theory (see Yonelinas, 2002).…”

“…As noted in the introduction, this is consistent with arguments by Zeelenberg et al (2004) and Balota and Spieler (1999), who suggest that there are multiple loci for repetition effects. When the stimulus, decision, and response are repeated, one should find facilitatory effects.…”

“…Turning to the nonwords, the advantage of repetition was decreased in the FM-confounded condition, which is also consistent with the predictions. Specifically, repeating nonwords produced an increase in stimulus familiarity, which decreased the advantage of repeating the response and decision (see Zeelenberg et al, 2004). The naming data yielded a frequency repetition interaction that reflected larger frequency effects on the first presentation than on the second presentation.…”

“…Thus, repetition priming for nonwords may be facilitatory if the memory trace of the former encounter, and of the interpretation associated to the stimulus, is retrieved. Zeelenberg, Wagenmakers, and Shiffrin (2004;see also Wagenmakers, Steyvers, et al, 2004; tried to distinguish the fast familiarity-based process that evaluates the global familiarity of words from the slower process that examines the interpretation (label) attached in recent encounters with a stimulus word or nonword, by considering facilitatory or inhibitory effects to nonwords. In Zeelenberg et al's study, when a nonword had been presented in a lexical decision task both in the study phase and in the test phase, there was a facilitatory effect of the repetition, due to the retrieval of the former encounter.…”

Another cup of TEE? The processing of second language near-cognates in first language reading

“…In consequence, any potential difference between how German speakers of Dutch process items like STOK and those like TRIK might arise out of any, or both, of these two differences. In particular, orthographic familiarity has been shown to influence word recognition both in single word processing (Zeelenberg, Wagenmakers, & Shiffrin, 2004) and in sentence reading (White & Liversedge, 2004). Therefore, if interested in the genuine cognate effect, i.e.…”