Polysemy effects in word naming.

Lichacz, Frederick M. J.; Herdman, Chris M.; LeFevre, Jo‐Anne; Baird, Brenda

doi:10.1037/h0087309

Cited by 21 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the past, effects have been reported for concreteness and imageability (e.g., Cortese et al, 1997;de Groot, 1989;James, 1975;Strain & Herdman, 1999;Strain et al, 1995;Zevin & Balota, 2000) and for polysemy (e.g., Borowsky & Masson, 1996;Gottlob et al, 1999;Hino & Lupker, 1996;Hino et al, 1998;Jastrzembski, 1981;Jastrzembski & Stanners, 1975;Kellas et al, 1988;Lichacz et al, 1999;Millis & Button, 1989;Pexman & Lupker, 1999;Rubenstein et al, 1970). The NOF effects reported here, presumably, are independent of these effects, because our word stimuli were all concrete nouns and were all nonpolysemous.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 49%

“…That is, responding in those tasks is usually faster to polysemous words than to nonpolysemous words (Borowsky & Masson, 1996;Gottlob, Goldinger, Stone, & Van Orden, 1999;Hino & Lupker, 1996;Hino, Lupker, Sears, & Ogawa, 1998;Jastrzembski, 1981;Jastrzembski & Stanners, 1975;Kellas, Ferraro, & Simpson, 1988;Lichacz, Herdman, LeFevre, & Baird, 1999;Millis & Button, 1989;Pexman & Lupker, 1999;Rubenstein, Garfield, & Millikan, 1970). This effect has proven difficult to explain for current models of word recognition.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The impact of feedback semantics in visual word recognition: Number-of-features effects in lexical decision and naming tasks

Pexman

Lupker

Hino

2002

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

171

173

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 49%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of feedback semantics in visual word recognition: Number-of-features effects in lexical decision and naming tasks

Pexman

Lupker

Hino

2002

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

171

173

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…When the task is to read aloud as quickly and accurately as possible, the reading system uses whatever information is at its disposal for each word. In the case of highly imageable words, semantic information is particularly salient, and several kinds of semantic information, including imageability, have been shown to facilitate reading aloud (Strain et al, 1995; Hino and Lupker, 1996; Lichacz et al, 1999; Strain and Herdman, 1999; Hino et al, 2002; Shibahara et al, 2003; Balota et al, 2004; Rodd, 2004; Woollams, 2005; Yap et al, 2012). Here we have shown that such facilitation by semantics may be neurally instantiated as an area associated with semantics (ITS) exerting a causal influence on an area associated with phonology (pSTG).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural networks underlying contributions from semantics in reading aloud

Boukrina¹,

Graves²

2013

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reading is an essential part of contemporary society, yet much is still unknown about the physiological underpinnings of its information processing components. Two influential cognitive models of reading, the connectionist and dual-route cascaded models, offer very different accounts, yet evidence for one or the other remains equivocal. These models differ in several ways, including the role of semantics (word meaning) in mapping spelling to sound. We used a new effective connectivity algorithm, IMaGES, to provide a network-level perspective on these network-level models. Left hemisphere regions of interest were defined based on main effects in functional magnetic resonance imaging and included two regions linked with semantic processing—angular gyrus (AG) and inferior temporal sulcus (ITS)—and two regions linked with phonological processing—posterior superior temporal gyrus (pSTG) and posterior middle temporal gyrus (pMTG). Participants read aloud words of high or low spelling-sound consistency, word frequency, and imageability. Only the connectionist model predicted increased contributions from semantic areas with those computing phonology for low-consistency words. Effective connectivity analyses revealed that areas supporting semantic processing (e.g., the ITS) interacted with phonological areas (e.g., the pSTG), with the pattern changing as a function of word properties. Connectivity from semantic to phonological areas emerged for high- compared to low-imageability words, and a similar pattern emerged for low-consistency words, though only under certain conditions. Analyses of individual differences also showed that variation in the strength of modulation of ITS by AG was associated with reading aloud performance. Overall, these results suggest that connections with semantic processing areas are not only associated with reading aloud, but that these connections are also associated with optimal reading performance.

show abstract

“…Each group of nouns was evenly divided into low-frequency (LF) and high-frequency (HF) groups. Frequency was included as a factor due to previous research indicating thai frequency and lexical atnbiguity may interact in the process of lexical selection (see Hino & Lupker, 1996;Lichacz et al, 1999). and that older adulls show stronger frequency effects than younger adults (Spieler & Balota, 2000).…”

Section: Materials and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lexical access in younger and older adults: The case of the mass/count distinction.

Taler¹,

Jarema²

2007

Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although lexicosemantic deficits are not typically seen in older adults, some studies indicate that age-related changes in semantic processing may occur. We had groups of older and younger adults perform speeded lexical decision on mass (e.g., honey), count (e.g., car), and dual nouns, which may be either mass or count (e.g., lamb). Singular dual nouns engendered significantly faster response times in older adults than mass and count nouns, whereas younger adults manifested similar response times to count and dual nouns. These results point toward a three-way distinction in the lexicon between mass, count, and dual nouns. Older adults appear to treat a larger set of nouns as dual than do younger adults. This may be due to awareness of the mass/count ambiguity present in a greater number of lexical items, as a result of their greater linguistic experience. Alternatively, in order to conserve processing resources, older adults may not activate mass/count information when recognizing a dual noun unless a mass or count reading is forced by context.

show abstract

Polysemy effects in word naming.

Cited by 21 publications

References 21 publications

The impact of feedback semantics in visual word recognition: Number-of-features effects in lexical decision and naming tasks

The impact of feedback semantics in visual word recognition: Number-of-features effects in lexical decision and naming tasks

Neural networks underlying contributions from semantics in reading aloud

Lexical access in younger and older adults: The case of the mass/count distinction.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About