Letter search and relatedness proportion: Further electrophysiological evidence for the automaticity of semantic activation

Automatic semantic activation was recently called a myth when the behavioral semantic priming effect was found to be subject to task demands. Semantic priming effects as measured by lexical decision times are typically reduced to the point of being absent when a letter search has to be performed on the prime word. It seems premature to draw any definite conclusion from this behavioral result as ERP recordings show that the same prime task leaves N400 priming effects unaffected. It is still a matter of debate whether N400 priming effects are generated chiefly by automatic or by cognitively controlled priming processes. In the present study we therefore recorded both lexical decision times and ERPs while we varied the ratio of related to unrelated prime-probe pairs (25% vs. 75% related) and thus manipulated the degree to which controlled mechanisms contribute to the semantic priming effect. Behavioral measures revealed reliable semantic priming effects only when RP was high and the influence of controlled processes hence increased. The modulation of the N400, however, provided clear-cut evidence of semantic processing at both RPs, indicating that semantic activation occurred even when RP was low and the involvement of controlled mechanisms was thus minimal.

[1]  James H. Neely,et al.  Is semantic activation automatic? A critical re-evaluation. , 2001 .

[2]  D. Besner,et al.  Levels of representation in visual word recognition: a dissociation between morphological and semantic processing. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  Lisa Maxfield,et al.  Attention and Semantic Priming: A Review of Prime Task Effects , 1997, Consciousness and Cognition.

[4]  P. Holcomb.  Automatic and attentional processing: An event-related brain potential analysis of semantic priming , 1988, Brain and Language.

[5]  Keith A Hutchison,et al.  Congruency effects in the letter search task: Semantic activation in the absence of priming , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[6]  Kristina Küper,et al.  Electrophysiology reveals semantic priming at a short SOA irrespective of depth of prime processing , 2009, Neuroscience Letters.

[7]  Patrick A. O’Connor,et al.  Fast trial pacing in a lexical decision task reveals a decay of automatic semantic activation. , 2010, Acta psychologica.

[8]  George Houghton,et al.  N400, the reference electrode, and the semantic activation in prime-task experiments: A reply to Dombrowski and Heil (2006) , 2007, Brain Research.

[9]  Peter Hagoort,et al.  The Processing Nature of the N400: Evidence from Masked Priming , 1993, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[10]  J Tzelgov,et al.  Automatic processes in lexical access and spreading activation. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  M. Kutas,et al.  Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. , 1980, Science.

[12]  M. Kutas,et al.  An Electrophysiological Probe of Incidental Semantic Association , 1989, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[13]  Avishai Henik,et al.  Capacity demands of automatic processes in semantic priming , 1994, Memory & cognition.

[14]  J. Raaijmakers,et al.  How to deal with "The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy": Common misconceptions and alternative solutions. , 1999 .

[15]  M. Heil,et al.  Automatic Semantic Activation Is No Myth , 2004, Psychological science.

[16]  M. C. Smith,et al.  Attention constraints of semantic activation during visual word recognition. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[17]  C. C. Wood,et al.  Event-related potentials, lexical decision and semantic priming. , 1985, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[18]  J. H. Neely,et al.  Semantic priming modulates the N400, N300, and N400RP , 2007, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[19]  S. Avons,et al.  Semantic activation and letter search: blocking or suppression? , 2010 .

[20]  J. H. Neely,et al.  Semantic Context Effects on Visual Word Processing: A Hybrid Prospective-Retrospective Processing Theory , 1989 .

[21]  Arnold J.W.M. Thomassen,et al.  Primed-lexical decision: the effect of varying the stimulus-onset asynchrony of prime and target , 1986 .

[22]  Colin M. Brown,et al.  The N400 as a function of the level of processing. , 1995, Psychophysiology.

[23]  D. Besner,et al.  Basic processes in reading: can functional phonological recoding be blocked? , 2006, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[24]  M. Heil,et al.  Letter search does not affect semantic priming in a probe naming task. , 2008, Acta psychologica.

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

[26]  J. H. Neely.  Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory: Roles of inhibitionless spreading activation and limited-capacity attention. , 1977 .

[27]  Ira Fischler,et al.  Associative facilitation without expectancy in a lexical decision task. , 1977 .

[28]  J. H. Neely,et al.  Semantic priming from letter-searched primes occurs for low- but not high-frequency targets: automatic semantic access may not be a myth. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[29]  T. McNamara.  Semantic Priming: Perspectives from Memory and Word Recognition , 2005 .

[30]  M. Heil,et al.  Semantic activation, letter search and N400: A reply to Mari-Beffa, Valdes, Cullen, Catena and Houghton (2005) , 2006, Brain Research.

[31]  D. Deacon,et al.  Event-related potential indices of semantic priming using masked and unmasked words: evidence that the N400 does not reflect a post-lexical process. , 2000, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.