Factors Determining Semantic Facilitation and Interference in the Cyclic Naming Paradigm

The cyclic naming paradigm, in which participants are slower to name pictures blocked by semantic category than pictures in an unrelated context, offers a window into the dynamics of the mapping between lexical concepts and words. Here we provide evidence for the view that incremental adjustments to the connection weights from semantics to lexical items provides an elegant explanation of a range of observations within the cyclic naming paradigm. Our principal experimental manipulation is to vary the within-category semantic distance among items that must be named together in a block. In the first set of experiments we find that naming latencies are, if anything, faster for within-category semantically close blocks compared to within-category semantically far blocks, for the first presentation of items. This effect can be explained by the fact that there will be more spreading activation, and thus greater priming at the lexical level, for within-category semantically close blocks than within-category semantically far blocks. We test this explanation by inserting intervening filler items (geometric shapes), and show as predicted, that while intervening unrelated trials abolish short-lived semantic priming effects, the long-lag interference effect that is characteristic of this paradigm is unaffected. These data place new constraints on explanations of the cyclic naming effect, and related phenomena, within a model of language production.

[1]  Gary M. Oppenheim,et al.  Cumulative semantic interference as learning , 2007, Brain and Language.

[2]  G S Dell,et al.  A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. , 1986, Psychological review.

[3]  Alfonso Caramazza,et al.  The cumulative semantic cost does not reflect lexical selection by competition. , 2010, Acta psychologica.

[4]  R. Schreuder,et al.  Semantic activation during object naming , 1987 .

[5]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Cascade processes in picture identification , 1988 .

[6]  Albert Costa,et al.  On the categorical nature of the semantic interference effect in the picture-word interference paradigm , 2005, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[7]  A. Roelofs,et al.  Goal-referenced selection of verbal action: modeling attentional control in the Stroop task. , 2003, Psychological review.

[8]  Sylvia A. A. Van Den Boogaard,et al.  Semantic facilitation and semantic interference in language production: Further evidence for the conceptual selection model of lexical access , 2004 .

[9]  Kenneth I Forster,et al.  DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy , 2003, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[10]  S. Monsell,et al.  Inhibition of Spoken Word Production by Priming a Semantic Competitor , 1994 .

[11]  Albert Costa,et al.  A further look at semantic context effects in language production: The role of response congruency , 2006 .

[12]  Gary M. Oppenheim,et al.  The dark side of incremental learning: A model of cumulative semantic interference during lexical access in speech production , 2010, Cognition.

[13]  Albert Costa,et al.  Set size and repetition in the picture–word interference paradigm: implications for models of naming , 2001, Cognition.

[14]  S. Lupker.  Picture Naming: An Investigation of the Nature of Categorical Priming , 1988 .

[15]  W. Heij,et al.  Components of Stroop-like interference in picture naming , 1988, Memory & cognition.

[16]  Albert Costa,et al.  Level of categorisation effect: A novel effect in the picture-word interference paradigm , 2003 .

[17]  W. Levelt,et al.  Semantic distance effects on object and action naming , 2002, Cognition.

[18]  A. Caramazza,et al.  Lexical access in bilingual speakers: What's the (hard) problem? , 2006, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.

[19]  Bradford Z. Mahon,et al.  Action-Related Properties Shape Object Representations in the Ventral Stream , 2007, Neuron.

[20]  Robert J Hartsuiker,et al.  Semantic and phonological context effects in speech error repair. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[21]  Alfonso Caramazza,et al.  Now You See it, Now you Don't: On Turning Semantic Interference Into Facilitation in a Stroop-Like Task , 2006, Cortex.

[22]  Albert Costa,et al.  The time course of word retrieval revealed by event-related brain potentials during overt speech , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[23]  Markus F Damian,et al.  Long-lasting semantic context effects in the spoken production of object names. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[24]  Wido La Heij,et al.  Semantic facilitation and semantic interference in word translation: Implications for models of lexical access in language production , 2003 .

[25]  M. Bajo.  Semantic facilitation with pictures and words. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[26]  W. Levelt,et al.  Effects of semantic context in the naming of pictures and words , 2001, Cognition.

[27]  Stephen J. Lupker,et al.  The semantic nature of response competition in the picture-word interference task , 1979 .

[28]  J. Kroll,et al.  Category Interference in Translation and Picture Naming: Evidence for Asymmetric Connections Between Bilingual Memory Representations , 1994 .

[29]  Alan S. Brown.  Inhibition in cued retrieval. , 1981 .

[30]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Perseverant responding in speeded naming of pictures: It's in the links. , 1991 .

[31]  Alissa Melinger,et al.  The dynamic microstructure of speech production: semantic interference built on the fly. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[32]  Jitendra Malik,et al.  Shape matching and object recognition using shape contexts , 2010, 2010 3rd International Conference on Computer Science and Information Technology.

[33]  M. Coltheart,et al.  Cumulative semantic inhibition in picture naming: experimental and computational studies , 2006, Cognition.

[34]  B. Rapp,et al.  Discreteness and interactivity in spoken word production. , 2000, Psychological review.

[35]  F-Xavier Alario,et al.  On the origin of the “cumulative semantic inhibition” effect , 2010, Memory & cognition.

[36]  R. Sperber,et al.  Semantic priming effects on picture and word processing , 1979 .

[37]  A. Caramazza.  How many levels of processing are there in lexical access , 1997 .

[38]  Terrence C. Biggs,et al.  Picture and Word Naming: Is Facilitation Due to Processing Overlap? , 1990 .

[39]  Alissa Melinger,et al.  When bees hamper the production of honey: lexical interference from associates in speech production. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[40]  A. Roelofs,et al.  A spreading-activation theory of lemma retrieval in speaking , 1992, Cognition.

[41]  Melanie Vitkovitch,et al.  Semantic priming over unrelated trials: Evidence for different effects in word and picture naming , 2006, Memory & cognition.

[42]  Janellen Huttenlocher,et al.  The source of relatedness effects on naming latency. , 1983 .

[43]  R. Job,et al.  Visual effects in picture and word categorization , 1999, Memory & cognition.

[44]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Age of acquisition effects in picture naming: evidence for a lexical-semantic competition hypothesis , 2005, Cognition.

[45]  K. McRae,et al.  Automatic semantic similarity priming. , 1998 .

[46]  A. Meyer,et al.  Refractory effects in picture naming as assessed in a semantic blocking paradigm , 2005, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[47]  Willem J. M. Levelt,et al.  A theory of lexical access in speech production , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.