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

[1]  D. Pecher,et al.  Perception is a two-way junction: Feedback semantics in word recognition , 2001, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[2]  S. Joordens,et al.  Turning an advantage into a disadvantage: Ambiguity effects in lexical decision versus reading tasks , 2000, Memory & cognition.

[3]  C M Herdman,et al.  Imageability effects in word naming: an individual differences analysis. , 1999, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[4]  S. Lupker,et al.  Ambiguity and visual word recognition: can feedback explain both homophone and polysemy effects? , 1999, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[5]  Ken McRae,et al.  Further evidence for feature correlations in semantic memory. , 1999, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[6]  Jo-Anne LeFevre,et al.  Polysemy effects in word naming. , 1999 .

[7]  S. Lupker,et al.  The effects of polysemy for Japanese katakana words , 1998 .

[8]  G C Van Orden,et al.  Pathway selection's utility for control of word recognition. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  Michael J Cortese,et al.  Effects of association and imageability on phonological mapping , 1997, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[10]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  On the nature and scope of featural representations of word meaning. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[11]  G. Stone,et al.  Perception Is a Two-Way Street: Feedforward and Feedback Phonology in Visual Word Recognition ☆ , 1997 .

[12]  Yasushi Hino,et al.  Effects of Polysemy in Lexical Decision and Naming: An Alternative to Lexical Access Accounts , 1996 .

[13]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Semantic effects in single-word naming. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[14]  James H. Neely,et al.  When target degradation does and does not enhance semantic context effects in word recognition. , 1995 .

[15]  G. C. Orden,et al.  Interdependence of form and function in cognitive systems explains perception of printed words. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  Derek Besner,et al.  When banking on meaning is not (yet) money in the bank: Explorations in connectionist modeling. , 1994 .

[17]  T. Shallice,et al.  Deep Dyslexia: A Case Study of , 1993 .

[18]  G. Stone,et al.  Strategic control of processing in word recognition. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[19]  D. Besner,et al.  Visual word recognition: a multistage activation model. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[20]  Matthew Flatt,et al.  PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers , 1993 .

[21]  M. C. Smith,et al.  Models of visual word recognition: When obscuring the stimulus yields a clearer view. , 1992 .

[22]  D L Medin,et al.  Concepts and conceptual structure. , 1989, The American psychologist.

[23]  L. Rips.  Similarity, typicality, and categorization , 1989 .

[24]  F. Keil.  Concepts, Kinds, and Cognitive Development , 1989 .

[25]  Stella Vosniadou,et al.  Similarity and analogical reasoning: a synthesis , 1989 .

[26]  James L. McClelland,et al.  A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. , 1989, Psychological review.

[27]  M. L. Millis,et al.  The effect of polysemy on lexical decision time: Now you see it, now you don’t , 1989, Memory & cognition.

[28]  Greg B. Simpson,et al.  Lexical ambiguity and the timecourse of attentional allocation in word recognition. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[29]  Gregory V. Jones.  Deep dyslexia, imageability, and ease of predication , 1985, Brain and Language.

[30]  J. Jastrzembski.  Multiple meanings, number of related meanings, frequency of occurrence, and the lexicon , 1981, Cognitive Psychology.

[31]  Robert F. Stanners,et al.  Multiple word meanings and lexical search speed , 1975 .

[32]  C. T. James.  The Role of Semantic Information in Lexical Decisions. , 1975 .

[33]  H. Rubenstein,et al.  Evidence for phonemic recoding in visual word recognition , 1971 .

[34]  H. Rubenstein,et al.  Homographic entries in the internal lexicon , 1970 .

[35]  S. Lupker,et al.  Ambiguity and synonymy effects in lexical decision, naming, and semantic categorization tasks: interactions between orthography, phonology, and semantics. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[36]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Category specificity in brain and mind , 2002 .

[37]  S. Lupker,et al.  Ambiguity and Synonymy Effects in Lexical Decision, Naming, and Semantic Categorization Tasks: Interactions Between Orthography, Phonology, and Semantics , 2002 .

[38]  B. M.,et al.  Representational Aspects of Word Imageability and Word Frequency as Assessed Through Word Association , 2001 .

[39]  D Jared,et al.  Homophone effects in lexical decision. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[40]  George S. Cree,et al.  Factors underlying category-specific semantic deficits , 2001 .

[41]  D. Balota,et al.  Priming and attentional control of lexical and sublexical pathways during naming. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[42]  G O Stone,et al.  Reading homographs: orthographic, phonologic, and semantic dynamics. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[43]  J. E.,et al.  Semantic Ambiguity Effects in Word Identification , 1996 .

[44]  Jay G. Rueckl,et al.  Ambiguity and connectionist networks: Still settling into a solution: Comment on Joordens and Besner (1994). , 1995 .

[45]  Derek Besner,et al.  Wrestling with ambiguity--further reflections: Reply to Masson and Borowsky (1995) and Rueckl (1995). , 1995 .

[46]  W. T. Farrar,et al.  When Two Meanings Are Better Than One : Modeling the Ambiguity Advantage Using a Recurrent Distributed Network , 1994 .

[47]  H. Kucera,et al.  Computational analysis of present-day American English , 1967 .