Semantic gradients in picture-word interference tasks: is the size of interference effects affected by the degree of semantic overlap?

We report two experiments attempting to identify the role of semantic relatedness in picture-word interference studies. Previously published data sets have rendered results which directly contradict each other, with one study suggesting that the stronger the relation between picture and distractor, the more semantic interference is obtained, and another study suggesting the opposite pattern. We replicated the two key experiments with only minor procedural modifications, and found semantic interference effects in both. Critically, these were largely independent of the strength of semantic overlap. Additionally, we attempted to predict individual interference effects per target picture, via various measures of semantic overlap, which also failed to account for the effects. From our results it appears that semantic interference effects in picture-word tasks are similarly present for weakly and strongly overlapping combinations. Implications are discussed in the light of the recent debate on the role of competition in lexical selection.

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

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

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

[4]  Patrick F. Reidy.  An Introduction to Latent Semantic Analysis , 2009 .

[5]  Elisabeth Dévière,et al.  Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R , 2009 .

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

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

[8]  J. G. Snodgrass,et al.  A standardized set of 260 pictures: norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. Human learning and memory.

[9]  A. Caramazza,et al.  When more is less: a counterintuitive effect of distractor frequency in the picture-word interference paradigm. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[10]  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.

[11]  Sunil J Rao,et al.  Regression Modeling Strategies: With Applications to Linear Models, Logistic Regression, and Survival Analysis , 2003 .

[12]  W. Glaser,et al.  Context effects in stroop-like word and picture processing. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[13]  Randi C. Martin,et al.  Semantic and phonological codes interact in single word production. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[14]  Melanie Vitkovitch,et al.  The Effects of Distractor Words on Naming Pictures at the Subordinate Level , 1999 .

[15]  Claudio Mulatti,et al.  Picture–word interference and the response–exclusion hypothesis , 2012, Cortex.

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

[17]  R. Ratcliff.  Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[18]  J. G. Snodgrass,et al.  A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. , 1980 .

[19]  Herbert Schriefers,et al.  Semantic competition between hierarchically related words during speech planning , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[20]  Athanassios Protopapas,et al.  Check Vocal: A program to facilitate checking the accuracy and response time of vocal responses from DMDX , 2007, Behavior research methods.

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

[22]  M. Damian,et al.  Is lexical selection in spoken word production competitive? Introduction to the special issue on lexical competition in language production , 2013 .

[23]  Paul M. B. Vitányi,et al.  The Google Similarity Distance , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

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

[25]  Albert Costa,et al.  The semantic interference effect in the picture-word interference paradigm: does the response set matter? , 2000, Cognition.

[26]  Herbert Schriefers,et al.  Distractor modality can turn semantic interference into semantic facilitation in the picture-word interference task: implications for theories of lexical access in speech production. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[27]  D. Mewhort,et al.  Analysis of Response Time Distributions: An Example Using the Stroop Task , 1991 .

[28]  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.

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

[30]  Allan Collins,et al.  A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing , 1975 .

[31]  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.

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

[33]  Ken McRae,et al.  Category - Specific semantic deficits , 2008 .

[34]  Allan Collins,et al.  A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing , 1975 .

[35]  W. Levelt,et al.  Word frequency effects in speech production: Retrieval of syntactic information and of phonological form , 1994 .

[36]  Jonathan Grainger,et al.  A funny thing happened on the way to articulation: N400 attenuation despite behavioral interference in picture naming , 2012, Cognition.

[37]  Albert Costa,et al.  Lexical Selection in Bilinguals: Do Words in the Bilingual's Two Lexicons Compete for Selection? , 1999 .

[38]  M. Garrett,et al.  Representing the meanings of object and action words: The featural and unitary semantic space hypothesis , 2004, Cognitive Psychology.

[39]  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.

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

[41]  W. Levelt.  Models of word production , 1999, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[42]  Paul M. B. Vitányi,et al.  Similarity of Objects and the Meaning of Words , 2006, TAMC.

[43]  Alfonso Caramazza,et al.  Semantic interference in a delayed naming task: evidence for the response exclusion hypothesis. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[44]  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 .

[45]  Wido La Heij,et al.  Semantic interference, orthographic facilitation, and their interaction in naming tasks. , 1995 .

[46]  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.

[47]  M. Ross Quillian,et al.  Retrieval time from semantic memory , 1969 .

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

[49]  Per Kragh Andersen,et al.  Regression Modeling Strategies with Applications to Linear Models, Logistic Regression and Survival Analysis. Frank E. Harrell, Jun, Springer‐Verlag, New York, 2001. No. of pages: 568. ISBN 0‐387‐95232‐2 , 2003 .

[50]  Z. Dienes.  Bayesian Versus Orthodox Statistics: Which Side Are You On? , 2011, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[51]  Ardi Roelofs,et al.  Testing a non-decompositional theory of lemma retrieval in speaking: Retrieval of verbs , 1993, Cognition.

[52]  Wido La Heij,et al.  Components of Stroop-like interference in picture naming , 1988 .

[53]  Ardi Roelofs,et al.  Set size and repetition matter: comment on Caramazza and Costa (2000) , 2001, Cognition.