Level of categorisation effect: A novel effect in the picture-word interference paradigm

In four experiments we explored the effects of two variables in the picture-word interference paradigm: semantic relatedness and the level of categorisation of distractors relative to pictures' names. Experiment 1 addressed whether the contrasting effects of semantically related distractors in category- and basic-level naming have a methodological origin (i.e., differences in the number of responses and the number of repetitions of responses between experiments). Experiments 2, 3 and 4 explored the effect of the level of categorisation of distractor words relative to the level of categorisation of the response, independent of semantic relatedness. Two main results are reported. First, the effect of semantically related distractors depends on the level of categorisation at which the response has to be given. Second, semantically unrelated distractors at the same level of categorisation as that of the response interfere more than unrelated distractors at a different level of categorisation. The implications of these results for the interpretation of picture-word interference effects and their implications for models of lexical access in speech production are discussed.

[1]  W. Glaser,et al.  The time course of picture-word interference. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[2]  H. H. Clark Speech errors as linguistic evidence. , 1975 .

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

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

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

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

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

[8]  F. Alario Aspects sémantiques de l'accès au lexique au cours de la production de parole , 2001 .

[9]  Chun R. Luo,et al.  Semantic Competition as The Basis of Stroop Interference: Evidence From Color-Word Matching Tasks , 1999 .

[10]  Colin M. Macleod Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. , 1991, Psychological bulletin.

[11]  A. Meyer Investigation of phonological encoding through speech error analyses: Achievements, limitations, and alternatives , 1992, Cognition.

[12]  S. Lupker The role of phonetic and orthographic similarity in picture-word interference. , 1982, Canadian journal of psychology.

[13]  Wayne D. Gray,et al.  Basic objects in natural categories , 1976, Cognitive Psychology.

[14]  P. Starreveld,et al.  What about phonological facilitation, response-set membership, and phonological coactivation? , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[15]  H. Schriefers,et al.  Phonological facilitation in picture-word interference experiments: Effects of stimulus onset asynchrony and types of interfering stimuli. , 1991 .

[16]  K Rayner,et al.  Graphemic and semantic similarity effects in the picture-word interference task. , 1986, British journal of psychology.

[17]  Peter A. Starreveld,et al.  On the Interpretation of Onsets of Auditory Context Effects in Word Production , 2000 .

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

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

[20]  T. Carr,et al.  Words, pictures, and priming: on semantic activation, conscious identification, and the automaticity of information processing. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  J. Segui,et al.  Semantic and Associative Priming in Picture Naming , 2000, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

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

[23]  Richard R. Rosinski,et al.  Picture-word interference is semantically based. , 1977 .

[24]  A Caramazza,et al.  The selection of determiners in noun phrase production. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

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

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

[27]  Albert Costa,et al.  Abstract phonological structure in language production : Evidence from Spanish , 1998 .

[28]  A. Cutler,et al.  Malapropisms and the structure of the mental lexicon , 1977 .

[29]  R. Golinkoff,et al.  Automatic semantic processing in a picture-word interference task. , 1975 .

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

[31]  W. Heij,et al.  Nonverbal Context Effects in Forward and Backward Word Translation: Evidence for Concept Mediation , 1996 .

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

[33]  A. Meyer Lexical Access in Phrase and Sentence Production: Results from Picture–Word Interference Experiments , 1996 .

[34]  W. Heij,et al.  Categorical interference and associative priming in picture naming. , 1990 .

[35]  H. Gross Errors in Linguistic Performance: Slips of the Tongue, Ear, Pen, and Hand , 1983 .

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

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

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

[39]  M. F. Garrett,et al.  The Analysis of Sentence Production1 , 1975 .