Resolving competition when naming an object in a multiple-object display

Naming an object in the context of other objects requires the selection and processing of the target object at different levels, while the processing of competing representations activated by context objects has to be constrained. At what stage are these competing representations attenuated? To address this question, we presented pairs of target and context objects that were either similar in visual shape (e.g., umbrella–palm tree) or dissimilar in visual shape (e.g., umbrella–ladder), so that the context object would attract various amounts of attention. The activation of the context object at different levels of processing was assessed by means of auditory distractors (semantically related, or phonologically related, or unrelated to the context object). Semantic and phonological distractor effects were observed for shape-related object pairs, but not for unrelated object pairs. This finding suggests that context objects do not activate their associated lexical representations to any substantial amount, unless they capture attention. In that case, they undergo full lexical processing up to a phonological level. Implications for models of word production are discussed.

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

[2]  Antje S. Meyer,et al.  Exploring the time course of lexical access in language production : Picture word interference studies , 1990 .

[3]  Antje S. Meyer,et al.  The time course of lexical access in speech production: A study of picture naming , 1991 .

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

[5]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Semantic interference effects on naming using a postcue procedure: Tapping the links between semantics and phonology with pictures and words. , 1995 .

[6]  P. Starreveld,et al.  Time-course analysis of semantic and orthographic context effects in picture naming. , 1996 .

[7]  J. Jescheniak,et al.  Discrete serial versus cascaded processing in lexical access in speech production : Further evidence from the coactivation of near-synonyms , 1998 .

[8]  R. R. Peterson,et al.  Lexical selection and phonological encoding during language production: Evidence for cascaded processing. , 1998 .

[9]  Herbert Schriefers,et al.  Representation and Processing of Grammatical Gender in Language Production: A Review , 1999 .

[10]  Anne Cutler,et al.  A theory of lexical access in speech production , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[11]  Michele Miozzo,et al.  Evidence for a cascade model of lexical access in speech production. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[12]  Rachel Jones Visual attention: Now you see it... , 2002, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[13]  Wido La Heij,et al.  Picture Naming in Picture Context: Semantic Interference or Semantic Facilitation? , 2003 .

[14]  Markus F Damian,et al.  Locus of semantic interference in picture-word interference tasks , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

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

[16]  Herbert Schriefers,et al.  Information flow in the mental lexicon during speech planning: evidence from event-related brain potentials. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[17]  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 .

[18]  J. Jescheniak,et al.  Context effects on lexical choice and lexical activation. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[19]  M. Tanenhaus,et al.  Looking at the rope when looking for the snake: Conceptually mediated eye movements during spoken-word recognition , 2005, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[20]  Albert Costa,et al.  Phonological activation of ignored pictures: Further evidence for a cascade model of lexical access , 2005 .

[21]  Wido La Heij,et al.  In Defense of the Lexical-Competition Account of Picture-Word Interference: A Comment On Finkbeiner and Caramazza (2006) , 2006, Cortex.

[22]  Anja Hahne,et al.  Phonological activation of category coordinates during speech planning is observable in children but not in adults: evidence for cascaded processing. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[23]  Ardi Roelofs,et al.  Context effects of pictures and words in naming objects, reading words, and generating simple phrases , 2006, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[24]  Matthew A Goldrick,et al.  Limited interaction in speech production: Chronometric, speech error, and neuropsychological evidence , 2006 .

[25]  Ardi Roelofs,et al.  A critique of simple name-retrieval models of spoken word planning , 2007 .

[26]  Antje S Meyer,et al.  Activation of distractor names in the picture-picture interference paradigm , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[27]  Bradford Z. Mahon,et al.  Lexical selection is not by competition: a reinterpretation of semantic interference and facilitation effects in the picture-word interference paradigm. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[28]  Jan Rouke Kuipers,et al.  Structural complexity is not the (big) issue: A reply to Roelofs (2007) , 2007 .

[29]  Falk Huettig,et al.  Visual-shape competition during language-mediated attention is based on lexical input and not modulated by contextual appropriateness , 2007 .

[30]  Robert J Hartsuiker,et al.  When you name the pizza you look at the coin and the bread: Eye movements reveal semantic activation during word production , 2008, Memory & cognition.

[31]  Herbert Schriefers,et al.  Conceptual coherence affects phonological activation of context objects during object naming. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[32]  A. Roelofs Tracing attention and the activation flow of spoken word planning using eye movements. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[33]  Alissa Melinger,et al.  Semantic context effects in language production: A swinging lexical network proposal and a review , 2009 .

[34]  Jan Rouke Kuipers,et al.  The limitations of cascading in the speech production system , 2009 .

[35]  Herbert Schriefers,et al.  Do perceived context pictures automatically activate their phonological code? , 2009, Experimental psychology.

[36]  Rasha Abdel Rahman,et al.  Now you see it … and now again: Semantic interference reflects lexical competition in speech production with and without articulation , 2010, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[37]  Herbert Schriefers,et al.  Semantic relatedness among objects promotes the activation of multiple phonological codes during object naming , 2010, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[38]  Antje S Meyer,et al.  The time course of name retrieval during multiple-object naming: evidence from extrafoveal-on-foveal effects. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[39]  Scott Watter,et al.  Phonological Facilitation from Pictures in a Word Association Task: Evidence for Routine Cascaded Processing in Spoken Word Production , 2010, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[40]  Herbert Schriefers,et al.  Ease of processing constrains the activation flow in the conceptual-lexical system during speech planning. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[41]  Frank Oppermann,et al.  Is there semantic interference in delayed naming? , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.