Sentential context and on-line lexical decision.

J. L. Nicol and D. Swinney (1989) reported that lexical decision response times to a test word that was related to the implicit object of a verb were faster, when tested immediately after the verb, than response times to a control test word. They concluded from this result that the relation between the implicit object and the verb was understood during comprehension. In G. McKoon, R. Ratcliff, and G. Ward (1994), another interpretation was suggested, that the faster lexical decision response times were due to the better semantic-pragmatic fit of the related test words to the sentential contexts, and experimental data were presented to support this interpretation. In response, J.L. Nicol, J. D. Fodor, and D. Swinney (1994) pointed out some possible problems with these experiments. The experiment presented in this article undermines their arguments. By using sentences in which there was no implicit object, exactly the same pattern of results was found as originally reported by J. L. Nicol and D. Swinney, thereby implicating some factor other than syntactic processing of an implicit object as an explanation of their finding.

[1]  B. Dosher,et al.  Integrated retrieval cues as a mechanism for priming in retrieval from memory , 1989 .

[2]  D. Swinney,et al.  Inference Generation During Auditory Language Comprehension , 1990 .

[3]  G. Hickok.  Parallel parsing: Evidence from reactivation in garden-path sentences , 1993 .

[4]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution , 1994 .

[5]  M J Pickering,et al.  Processing syntactically ambiguous sentences: Evidence from semantic priming , 1993, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[6]  R Ratcliff,et al.  Retrieving information from memory: spreading-activation theories versus compound-cue theories. , 1994, Psychological review.

[7]  R Ratcliff,et al.  Testing theories of language processing: an empirical investigation of the on-line lexical decision task. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[8]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Spreading activation versus compound cue accounts of priming: mediated priming revisited. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[9]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  A retrieval theory of priming in memory. , 1988, Psychological review.

[10]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Inference during reading. , 1992, Psychological review.

[11]  K. Forster.  Priming and the Effects of Sentence and Lexical Contexts on Naming Time: Evidence for Autonomous Lexical Processing* , 1981 .

[12]  R Ratcliff,et al.  Discourse models, pronoun resolution, and the implicit causality of verbs. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[13]  D Swinney,et al.  The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension , 1989, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[14]  I. Fischler,et al.  Automatic and attentional processes in the effects of sentence contexts on word recognition , 1979 .

[15]  Beth Levin,et al.  English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation , 1993 .

[16]  K. Stanovich,et al.  On priming by a sentence context. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[17]  K. Stanovich,et al.  Robust effects of syntactic structure on visual word processing , 1986, Memory & cognition.

[18]  Janet D. Fodor,et al.  Using cross-modal lexical decision tasks to investigate sentence processing. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[19]  Janet Dean Fodor,et al.  Processing empty categories: A question of visibility. , 1993 .