Semantic priming in the prime task effect: Evidence of automatic semantic processing of distractors (original) (raw)
Related papers
Semantic priming in the lexical decision task: Roles of prospec-tive prime-generated expectancies an
1989
In semantic priming paradigms for lexical decisions, the probability that a word target is semantically related to its prime (the relatedness proportion) has been confounded with the probability that a target is a nonword, given that it is unrelated to its prime (the nonword ratio). This study unconfounded these two probabilities in a lexical decision task with category names as primes and with high-and low-dominance exemplars as targets. Semantic priming for highdominance exemplars was modulated by the relatedness proportion and, to a lesser degree, by the nonword ratio. However, the nonword ratio exerted a stronger influence than did the relatedness proportion on semantic priming for low-dominance exemplars and on the nonword facilitation effect (i.e., the superiority in performance for nonword targets that follow a category name rather than a neutral XXX prime). These results suggest that semantic priming for lexical decisions is affected by both a prospective prime-generated expectancy, modulated by the relatedness proportion, and a retrospective target/prime semantic matching process, modulated by the nonword ratio. People are typically faster and more accurate in responding to a target word when it is accompanied by or immediately preceded by a semantically related priming word, relative to an unrelated priming word (e.g,, Meyer & Schvaneveldt, 1971; Neely, 1976). This semantic priming effect has most often been studied in the lexical decision task, in which subjects indicate whether a target letter string (e.g., robin or tark) is a word or a nonword. The relatedness proportion effect is the finding that semantic priming increases in magnitude with increases in the proportion of related word-prime/word-target trials-a proportion hereafter referred to as the relatedness proportion. The relatedness proportion effect is very robust and has been obtained across a wide range of procedural variations in the lexical decision task (de Groot,
Word-based grouping affects the prime-task effect on semantic priming
2000
Semantic priming between words is reduced or eliminated if a low-level task such as letter search is performed on the prime word (the prime task effect), a finding used to question the automaticity of semantic processing of words. This idea is critically examined in 3 experiments with a new design that allows the search target to occur both inside and outside the prime word.
Semantic priming in the lexical decision task: Roles of prospective prime- …
Journal of Experimental …
In semantic priming paradigms for lexical decisions, the probability that a word target is semantically related to its prime (the relatedness proportion) has been confounded with the probability that a target is a nonword, given that it is unrelated to its prime (the nonword ratio). This study ...
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1989
In semantic priming paradigms for lexical decisions, the probability that a word target is semantically related to its prime (the relatedness proportion) has been confounded with the probability that a target is a nonword, given that it is unrelated to its prime (the nonword ratio). This study unconfounded these two probabilities in a lexical decision task with category names as primes and with high-and low-dominance exemplars as targets. Semantic priming for highdominance exemplars was modulated by the relatedness proportion and, to a lesser degree, by the nonword ratio. However, the nonword ratio exerted a stronger influence than did the relatedness proportion on semantic priming for low-dominance exemplars and on the nonword facilitation effect (i.e., the superiority in performance for nonword targets that follow a category name rather than a neutral XXX prime). These results suggest that semantic priming for lexical decisions is affected by both a prospective prime-generated expectancy, modulated by the relatedness proportion, and a retrospective target/prime semantic matching process, modulated by the nonword ratio. People are typically faster and more accurate in responding to a target word when it is accompanied by or immediately preceded by a semantically related priming word, relative to an unrelated priming word (e.g,, Meyer & Schvaneveldt, 1971; Neely, 1976). This semantic priming effect has most often been studied in the lexical decision task, in which subjects indicate whether a target letter string (e.g., robin or tark) is a word or a nonword. The relatedness proportion effect is the finding that semantic priming increases in magnitude with increases in the proportion of related word-prime/word-target trials-a proportion hereafter referred to as the relatedness proportion. The relatedness proportion effect is very robust and has been obtained across a wide range of procedural variations in the lexical decision task (de Groot,
Journal of Experimental Psychology: …, 1998
found that form-primes (e.g., contrast-CONTRA CT) were effective only with masked primes. C. Veres (1986) obtained the same effect for word primes but found that nonword primes (e.g., controct) were effective regardless of masking. In a lexical-decision task, the present study failed to find any priming with word primes but only when the nonword distractors were very close to a particular word (e.g., UNIVORSE). With more distant nonword distractors (e.g., ANIVORSE), priming with word primes was restored in the masked condition. In terms of an entry-opening model of priming, this effect was interpreted as a blocking of priming by a postaccess checking operation. Alternatively, in an interactive activation model, this effect could be modeled either by decreasing the strength of lexical competition or by changing the decision criterion from local to global activation. Many recent investigations into the processes of visual word recognition have used a priming paradigm in which the relationship between the prime and the target is one of similarity of form rather than meaning
Memory & Cognition, 2008
The initial demonstration by Meyer, Schvaneveldt, and Ruddy (1972, 1974) that the identification of a word is accelerated by the prior processing of a word semantically or associatively related to it has since been the topic of numerous studies. One long-debated question concerns the amount of actual semantic processing that is involved in priming. This issue involves both the type of relationship that produces priming and the type of task best-suited to test for semantic processing (for reviews, see Forster, 2004; Hutchison, 2003; Lucas, 2000; McRae & Boisvert, 1998). The present series of experiments provides insight concerning both of these subjects.
The long and short of semantic priming effects in lexical decision
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 1997
described a theory of priming that predicts long-term effects for all forms of relatedness. This prediction is reconciled with previous failures to observe long-term semantic priming on the basis of 2 claims: (a) that previously used pairs share few semantic features and (b) that tasks typically used to study priming are not especially sensitive to semantic influences. The present experiments provide further support for these claims by demonstrating long-term semantic priming in the lexical-decision task when the stimuli and task are modified in a way that increases semantic involvement. However, the findings suggest that in addition to the mechanism advocated by Becker et al., a second mechanism is necessary to provide a complete account of semantic priming effects. Meyer and Schvaneveldt (1971) introduced the lexicaldecision task as a tool for learning more about the processes and mechanisms underlying semantic memory. In its original form, the task consisted of two letter strings simultaneously presented, with participants instructed to press one key if both stimuli were words, and another key if one or both of the stimuli were nonwords. Findings from that task indicated that correct "word** responses could be emitted faster if the stimuli consisted of a pair of semantically related words (e.g., sky-cloud) than if the stimuli consisted of apair of semantically unrelated words (e.g., car-cloud). This phenomenon is called semantic priming. In follow-up work, Meyer, Schvaneveldt, and Ruddy (1972) discovered two other facts about semantic priming. The first was that the priming observed in the original study was also observed with a procedure in which participants had to judge the lexical status of a single item that either was or was not preceded by a semantically related associate. The second discovery was that the magnitude of the semantic priming effect was strongly affected if items were presented between the prime and target. In their experiment, they found that the strong semantic priming effect observed when the prime and target were presented consecutively became
Automatic and controlled semantic processing: A masked prime-task effect
2005
Abstract A classical definition of automaticity establishes that automatic processing occurs without attention or consciousness, and cannot be controlled. Previous studies have demonstrated that semantic priming can be reduced if attention is directed to a low-level of analysis. This finding suggests that semantic processing is not automatic since it can be controlled. In this paper, we present two experiments that demonstrate that semantic processing may occur in the absence of attention and consciousness.
Priming effects on lexical access and decision processes: A signal-detection analysis
Psychological Research, 1992
to examine the assumption that in a lexical-decision task context effects are primarily the result of post-access processes. Experiment 1, in which prime-relatedness was varied within subjects, found changes in target sensitivity (d') without corresponding changes in the response criterion. This outcome was interpreted as evidence that prior context facilitates lexical access, whereas post-access contributions remain constant across conditions. When primerelatedness was varied between subjects in Experiment 2, the lexical-decision task showed differing context effects on access processes as well as on post-access processes. It was concluded that subjects adopt a single response criterion suited to maximize task performance. The particular response criterion adopted is a function of the stimulus set rather than a function of the relationship between prime and target on any single trial. Finally, it was concluded that post-access strategies alone are insufficient to account for context effects obtained when typical lexical-decision-task procedures are used, or to account for the magnitude of the differences obtained between the present experiments.