The Experts below are selected from a list of 285 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Penny M. Pexman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Effects of iconicity in Lexical Decision
Language and Cognition, 2019Co-Authors: David M. Sidhu, Gabriella Vigliocco, Penny M. PexmanAbstract:In contrast to arbitrariness, a recent perspective is that words contain both arbitrary and iconic aspects. We investigated iconicity in word recognition, and the possibility that iconic words have special links between phonological and semantic features that may facilitate their processing. In Experiment 1, participants completed a Lexical Decision task (“Is this letter string a word?”) including words varying in their iconicity. Notably, we manipulated stimulus presentation conditions such that the items were visually degraded for half of the participants; this manipulation has been shown to increase reliance on phonology. Responses to words higher in iconicity were faster and more accurate, but this did not interact with condition. In Experiment 2 we explicitly directed participants’ attention to phonology by using a phonological Lexical Decision task (“Does this letter string sound like a word?”). Responses to words that were higher in iconicity were once again faster. These results demonstrate facilitatory effects of iconicity in Lexical processing, thus showing that the benefits of iconic mappings extend beyond those reported for language learning and those argued for language evolution.
-
Semantic richness effects in Lexical Decision: The role of feedback
Memory & Cognition, 2015Co-Authors: Melvin J. Yap, Gail Y. Lim, Penny M. PexmanAbstract:Across Lexical processing tasks, it is well established that words with richer semantic representations are recognized faster. This suggests that the Lexical system has access to meaning before a word is fully identified, and is consistent with a theoretical framework based on interactive and cascaded processing. Specifically, semantic richness effects are argued to be produced by feedback from semantic representations to lower-level representations. The present study explores the extent to which richness effects are mediated by feedback from Lexical- to letter-level representations. In two Lexical Decision experiments, we examined the joint effects of stimulus quality and four semantic richness dimensions (imageability, number of features, semantic neighborhood density, semantic diversity). With the exception of semantic diversity, robust additive effects of stimulus quality and richness were observed for the targeted dimensions. Our results suggest that semantic feedback does not typically reach earlier levels of representation in Lexical Decision, and further reinforces the idea that task context modulates the processing dynamics of early word recognition processes.
-
Pseudohomophone processing in the Lexical Decision task
2007Co-Authors: Linda Kerswell, Paul D. Siakaluk, William J. Owen, Penny M. PexmanAbstract:Lexical Decision responses to pseudohomophones (e.g., brane) are slower and more error prone than to pseudowords (e.g., frane). It is assumed that this occurs because pseudohomophones activate phonological and perhaps semantic information of their base words. We tested this assumption directly by examining the effects of orthographic, phonological, and semantic variables on Lexical Decision response times (RT) and errors to pseudohomophones using standard multiple regression. We observed significant effects of base word log frequency (RT, errors), orthographic neighbourhood size (RT, errors), orthographic similarity (errors), and word body status (extant or novel) of the pseudohomophones (RT, errors).
-
ambiguity and synonymy effects in Lexical Decision naming and semantic categorization tasks interactions between orthography phonology and semantics
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 2002Co-Authors: Yasushi Hino, Stephen J. Lupker, Penny M. PexmanAbstract:In this article, ambiguity and synonymy effects were examined in Lexical Decision, naming, and semantic categorization tasks. Whereas the typical ambiguity advantage was observed in Lexical Decision and naming, an ambiguity disadvantage was observed in semantic categorization. In addition, a synonymy effect (slower latencies for words with many synonyms than for words with few synonyms) was observed in Lexical Decision and naming but not in semantic categorization. These results suggest that (a) an ambiguity disadvantage arises only when a task requires semantic processing, (b) the ambiguity advantage and the synonymy disadvantage in Lexical Decision and naming are due to semantic feedback, and (c) these effects are determined by the nature of the feedback relationships from semantics to
-
Homophone effects in Lexical Decision.
Journal of experimental psychology. Learning memory and cognition, 2001Co-Authors: Penny M. Pexman, Stephen J. Lupker, Debra JaredAbstract:The role of phonology in word recognition was investigated in 6 Lexical-Decision experiments involving homophones (e.g., MAID-MADE). The authors' goal was to determine whether homophone effects arise in the Lexical-Decision task and, if so, in what situations they arise, with a specific focus on the question of whether the presence of pseudohomophone foils (e.g., BRANE) causes homophone effects to be eliminated because of strategic deemphasis of phonological processing. All 6 experiments showed significant homophone effects, which were not eliminated by the presence of pseudohomophone foils. The authors propose that homophone effects in Lexical Decision are due to the nature of feedback from phonology to orthography.
Manuel Perea - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
On the limits of familiarity accounts in Lexical Decision: The case of repetition effects:
Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2019Co-Authors: Manuel Perea, Ana Marcet, Marta Vergara-martínez, Pablo GomezAbstract:Recent modelling accounts of the Lexical Decision task have suggested that the reading system performs evidence accumulation to carry out some functions. Evidence accumulation models have been very successful in accounting for effects in the Lexical Decision task, including the dissociation of repetition effects for words and nonwords (facilitative for words but inhibitory for nonwords). The familiarity of a repeated item triggers its recognition, which facilitates 'word' responses but hampers nonword rejection. However, reports of facilitative repetition effects for nonwords with several repetitions in short blocks challenge this hypothesis and favour models based on episodic retrieval. To shed light on the nature of the repetition effects for nonwords in Lexical Decision, we conducted four experiments to examine the impact of extra-Lexical source of information-we induced the use of episodic retrieval traces via instructions and list composition. When the initial block was long, the repetition effect for nonwords was inhibitory, regardless of the instructions and list composition. However, the inhibitory effect was dramatically reduced when the initial block included two presentations of the stimuli and it was even facilitatory when the initial block was short. This composite pattern suggests that evidence accumulation models of Lexical Decision should take into account all sources of evidence-including episodic retrieval-during the process of Lexical Decision.
-
Can response congruency effects be obtained in masked priming Lexical Decision
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 2018Co-Authors: María Fernández-lópez, Ana Marcet, Manuel PereaAbstract:In past decades, researchers have conducted a myriad of masked priming Lexical Decision experiments aimed at unveiling the early processes underlying Lexical access. A relatively overlooked question is whether a masked unrelated wordlike/unwordlike prime influences the processing of the target stimuli. If participants apply to the primes the same instructions as to the targets, one would predict a response congruency effect (e.g., book-TRUE faster than fiok-TRUE). Critically, the Bayesian Reader model predicts that there should be no effects of response congruency in masked priming Lexical Decision, whereas interactive-activation models offer more flexible predictions. We conducted 3 masked priming Lexical Decision experiments with 4 unrelated priming conditions differing in Lexical status and wordlikeness (high-frequency word, low-frequency word, orthographically legal pseudoword, consonant string). Experiment 1 used wordlike nonwords as foils, Experiment 2 used illegal nonwords as foils, and Experiment 3 used orthographically legal hermit nonwords as foils. When the foils were orthographically legal (Experiments 1 and 3; i.e., a standard Lexical Decision scenario), Lexical Decision responses were not affected by the Lexical status or wordlikeness of the unrelated primes, as predicted by the Bayesian Reader model and the selective inhibition hypothesis in interactive-activation models. When the foils were illegal (Experiment 2), consonant-string primes produced the slowest responses for word targets and the fastest responses for nonword targets. The Bayesian Reader model can capture this pattern, assuming that participants in Experiment 2 were making an orthographic legality Decision (i.e., anything legal must be a word) rather than a Lexical Decision. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
-
is the go no go Lexical Decision task preferable to the yes no task with developing readers
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 2011Co-Authors: Carmen Morettatay, Manuel PereaAbstract:The Lexical Decision task is probably the most common laboratory visual word identification task together with the naming task. In the usual setup, participants need to press the "yes" button when the stimulus is a word and the "no" button when the stimulus is not a word. A number of studies have employed this task with developing readers; however, error rates and/or response times tend to be quite high. One way to make the task easier for young readers is by employing a go/no-go procedure: "If word, press 'yes'; if not, refrain from responding." Here we conducted a Lexical Decision experiment that systematically compared the yes/no and go/no-go variants of the Lexical Decision task with developing readers (second- and fourth-grade children). Results showed that (a) error rates for words and nonwords were much lower in the go/no-go task than in the yes/no task, (b) Lexical Decision times were substantially faster in the go/no-go task, and (c) there was less variability in the latency data of the go/no-go task for high-frequency words. Thus, the go/no-go Lexical Decision task is preferable to the "standard" yes/no task when conducting experiments with developing readers.
-
Is the Go/No-Go Lexical Decision Task Preferable to the Yes/No Task with Developing Readers?.
Journal of experimental child psychology, 2011Co-Authors: Carmen Moret-tatay, Manuel PereaAbstract:The Lexical Decision task is probably the most common laboratory visual word identification task together with the naming task. In the usual setup, participants need to press the "yes" button when the stimulus is a word and the "no" button when the stimulus is not a word. A number of studies have employed this task with developing readers; however, error rates and/or response times tend to be quite high. One way to make the task easier for young readers is by employing a go/no-go procedure: "If word, press 'yes'; if not, refrain from responding." Here we conducted a Lexical Decision experiment that systematically compared the yes/no and go/no-go variants of the Lexical Decision task with developing readers (second- and fourth-grade children). Results showed that (a) error rates for words and nonwords were much lower in the go/no-go task than in the yes/no task, (b) Lexical Decision times were substantially faster in the go/no-go task, and (c) there was less variability in the latency data of the go/no-go task for high-frequency words. Thus, the go/no-go Lexical Decision task is preferable to the "standard" yes/no task when conducting experiments with developing readers.
-
The frequency effect for pseudowords in the Lexical Decision task.
Perception & psychophysics, 2005Co-Authors: Manuel Perea, Eva Rosa, Consolación GómezAbstract:Four experiments were designed to investigate whether the frequency of words used to create pseudowords plays an important role in Lexical Decision. Computational models of the Lexical Decision task (e.g., the dual route cascaded model and the multiple read-out model) predict that latencies to lowfrequency pseudowords should be faster than latencies to high-frequency pseudowords. Consistent with this prediction, results showed that when the pseudowords were created by replacing one internal letter of the base word (Experiments 1 and 3), high-frequency pseudowords yielded slower latencies than low-frequency pseudowords. However, this effect occurred only in the leading edge of the response time (RT) distributions. When the pseudowords were created by transposing two adjacent internal letters (Experiment 2), high-frequency pseudowords produced slower latencies in the leading edge and in the bulk of the RT distributions. These results suggest that transposed-letter pseudowords may be more similar to their base words than replacement-letter pseudowords. Finally, when participants performed a go/no-go Lexical Decision task with one-letter different pseudowords (Experiment 4), high-frequency pseudowords yielded substantially faster latencies than low-frequency pseudowords, which suggests that the Lexical entries of high-frequency words can be verified earlier than the Lexical entries of low-frequency words. The implications of these results for models of word recognition and Lexical Decision are discussed.
Pablo Gomez - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
On the limits of familiarity accounts in Lexical Decision: The case of repetition effects:
Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2019Co-Authors: Manuel Perea, Ana Marcet, Marta Vergara-martínez, Pablo GomezAbstract:Recent modelling accounts of the Lexical Decision task have suggested that the reading system performs evidence accumulation to carry out some functions. Evidence accumulation models have been very successful in accounting for effects in the Lexical Decision task, including the dissociation of repetition effects for words and nonwords (facilitative for words but inhibitory for nonwords). The familiarity of a repeated item triggers its recognition, which facilitates 'word' responses but hampers nonword rejection. However, reports of facilitative repetition effects for nonwords with several repetitions in short blocks challenge this hypothesis and favour models based on episodic retrieval. To shed light on the nature of the repetition effects for nonwords in Lexical Decision, we conducted four experiments to examine the impact of extra-Lexical source of information-we induced the use of episodic retrieval traces via instructions and list composition. When the initial block was long, the repetition effect for nonwords was inhibitory, regardless of the instructions and list composition. However, the inhibitory effect was dramatically reduced when the initial block included two presentations of the stimuli and it was even facilitatory when the initial block was short. This composite pattern suggests that evidence accumulation models of Lexical Decision should take into account all sources of evidence-including episodic retrieval-during the process of Lexical Decision.
-
A diffusion model account of criterion shifts in the Lexical Decision task
Journal of memory and language, 2008Co-Authors: Eric-jan Wagenmakers, Roger Ratcliff, Pablo Gomez, Gail MckoonAbstract:Performance in the Lexical Decision task is highly dependent on Decision criteria. These criteria can be influenced by speed versus accuracy instructions and word/nonword proportions. Experiment 1 showed that error responses speed up relative to correct responses under instructions to respond quickly. Experiment 2 showed that that responses to less probable stimuli are slower and less accurate than responses to more probable stimuli. The data from both experiments support the diffusion model for Lexical Decision (Ratcliff, Gomez, & McKoon, 2004). At the same time, the data provide evidence against the popular deadline model for Lexical Decision. The deadline model assumes that "nonword" responses are given only after the "word" response has timed out - consequently, the deadline model cannot account for the data from experimental conditions in which "nonword" responses are systematically faster than "word" responses.
-
a diffusion model account of criterion shifts in the Lexical Decision task
Journal of Memory and Language, 2008Co-Authors: Eric-jan Wagenmakers, Roger Ratcliff, Pablo Gomez, Gail MckoonAbstract:Performance in the Lexical Decision task is highly dependent on Decision criteria. These criteria can be influenced by speed versus accuracy instructions and word/nonword proportions. Experiment 1 showed that error responses speed up relative to correct responses under instructions to respond quickly. Experiment 2 showed that responses to less probable stimuli are slower and less accurate than responses to more probable stimuli. The data from both experiments support the diffusion model for Lexical Decision [Ratcliff, R., Gomez, P., & McKoon, G. (2004a). A diffusion model account of the Lexical Decision task. Psychological Review, 111, 159–182]. At the same time, the data provide evidence against the popular deadline model for Lexical Decision. The deadline model assumes that “nonword” responses are given only after the “word” response has timed out—consequently, the deadline model cannot account for the data from experimental conditions in which “nonword” responses are systematically faster than “word” responses.
-
a diffusion model account of the Lexical Decision task
Psychological Review, 2004Co-Authors: Roger Ratcliff, Pablo Gomez, Gail MckoonAbstract:The Lexical Decision task is one of the most widely used paradigms in psychology. The goal of the research described in this article was to account for Lexical Decision performance with the diffusion model (Ratcliff, 1978), a model that allows components of cognitive processing to be examined in two-choice Decision tasks. Nine Lexical Decision experiments, manipulating a number of factors known to affect Lexical Decision performance, are presented. The diffusion model gives good fits to the data from all of the experiments, including mean response times for correct and error responses, the relative speeds of correct and error responses, the distributions of response times, and accuracy rates. In the diffusion model, the mechanism underlying two-choice Decisions is the accumulation of noisy information from a stimulus over time. Information accumulates toward one or the other of two Decision criteria until one of the criteria is reached; then the response associated with that criterion is initiated. In the Lexical Decision task, one of the criteria is associated with a word response, the other with a nonword response. The rate with which information is accumulated is called drift rate, and it depends on the quality of information from the stimulus. In Lexical Decision, some stimuli are more wordlike than others, and so their rate of accumulation of information toward the word criterion is faster; other stimuli, such as random letter strings, are so un-wordlike that information accumulates quickly toward the nonword criterion. For the nine experiments presented below, the drift rates can be summarized quite simply. First, the ordering of the drift rates from largest to smallest is as follows: high-frequency words, low-frequency words, very low-frequency words, pseudowords, and random letter strings. Second, the differences among the drift rates are larger when the nonwords in an experiment are pseudowords than when they are random letter strings. For our framework, Figure 1 outlines the relationships among Lexical Decision data, the diffusion model, and word recognition (Lexical) models, and shows how the data do not map directly to Lexical processes but, instead, map to Lexical processes only through the mediation of the diffusion model. Data enter the diffusion model, which produces the values of drift rates for the different classes of stimuli that give the best account of the data. In this framework, the role of a word recognition model is to produce values for stimuli for how wordlike they are. We call the measure of how wordlike a stimulus is its wordness value (a term intended to be neutral for the purposes of this article). Wordness values map onto the drift rates that drive the diffusion Decision process to produce predictions about accuracy and response time. Figure 1 The relationship between data, the diffusion model fits, drift rates, and models of word identification. The diffusion model fits the data and provides values of drift rate that represent how wordlike the stimulus is. The word identification models need ... In our framework, wordness values place fewer constraints on word recognition models for the Lexical Decision task than has been appreciated. All that is required is that a model produce the appropriate ordering of wordness values: from high-frequency words to low- and very low-frequency words to pseudowords and random letter strings, with larger differences among them when the nonwords in an experiment are pseudowords than when they are random letter strings. In other words, the disturbing and simple conclusion from the diffusion model’s account of Lexical Decision is that, beyond what can be said from a bare ordering of wordness values, the Lexical Decision task may have nothing to say about Lexical representations or about Lexical processes such as Lexical access. Lexical Decision data do not provide the window into the lexicon that might have been supposed in earlier research. The framework shown in Figure 1 is counter to much previous work that has assumed Lexical Decision data do map directly onto Lexical processes. Often, Lexical Decision response time (RT) has been interpreted as a direct measure of the speed with which a word can be accessed in the lexicon. For example, some researchers have argued that the well-known effect of word frequency—shorter RTs for higher frequency words—demonstrates the greater accessibility of high-frequency words (e.g., their order in a serial search, Forster, 1976; the resting levels of activation in units representing the words in a parallel processing system, Morton, 1969). However, other researchers have argued, as we do here, against a direct mapping from RT to accessibility. For example, Balota and Chumbley (1984) suggested that the effect of word frequency might be a by-product of the nature of the task itself and not a manifestation of accessibility. In the research presented here, the diffusion model makes explicit how such a by-product might come about. The sections below begin with a detailed description of the diffusion model; then nine experiments are presented, and the model is fit to the data from each one. The main result is that the differences in performance for various classes of stimuli are all captured by drift rate, not by any of the other components of processing that make up the diffusion model.
-
a diffusion model account of the Lexical Decision task
Psychological Review, 2004Co-Authors: Roger Ratcliff, Pablo Gomez, Gail MckoonAbstract:The diffusion model for 2-choice Decisions (R. Ratcliff, 1978) was applied to data from Lexical Decision experiments in which word frequency, proportion of high- versus low-frequency words, and type of nonword were manipulated. The model gave a good account of all of the dependent variables--accuracy, correct and error response times, and their distributions--and provided a description of how the component processes involved in the Lexical Decision task were affected by experimental variables. All of the variables investigated affected the rate at which information was accumulated from the stimuli--called drift rate in the model. The different drift rates observed for the various classes of stimuli can all be explained by a 2-dimensional signal-detection representation of stimulus information. The authors discuss how this representation and the diffusion model's Decision process might be integrated with current models of Lexical access.
Yasushi Hino - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the processing advantage and disadvantage for homophones in Lexical Decision tasks
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 2013Co-Authors: Yasushi Hino, Yuu Kusunose, Stephen J. Lupker, Debra JaredAbstract:Studies using the Lexical Decision task with English stimuli have demonstrated that homophones are responded to more slowly than nonhomophonic controls. In contrast, several studies using Chinese stimuli have shown that homophones are responded to more rapidly than nonhomophonic controls. In an attempt to better understand the impact of homophony, we investigated homophone effects for Japanese kanji words in a Lexical Decision task. The results indicated that, whereas a processing disadvantage emerged for homophones when they have only a single homophonic mate (as in the English experiments), a processing advantage occurred for homophones when they have multiple homophonic mates (as in the Chinese experiments). On the basis of these results, we discuss the nature of the processes that may be responsible for producing the processing advantages and disadvantages for homophones.
-
Orthographic and phonological neighborhood size effects for Japanese Katakana words in a Lexical Decision task
Shinrigaku kenkyu : The Japanese journal of psychology, 2011Co-Authors: Yasushi Hino, Mariko Nakayama, Shinobu Miyamura, Yuu KusunoseAbstract:In the present study, we examined the effects of orthographic and phonological neighborhood sizes for Japanese Katakana words using a Lexical Decision task. Kawakami (2002) reported an inhibitory orthographic neighborhood size effect along with a null phonological neighborhood size effect in his Lexical Decision tasks. In contrast, Grainger, Muneaux, Farioli, and Ziegler (2005) reported an interaction between orthographic and phonological neighborhood sizes in a Lexical Decision task. Therefore, we re-examined the effects of orthographic and phonological neighborhood sizes for low-frequency Katakana words in a Lexical Decision task. Consistent with Grainger et al., we found the interaction between orthographic and phonological neighborhood sizes, indicating that Lexical Decision performance for Katakana words is modulated by the nature of orthographic-phonological relationships.
-
ambiguity and synonymy effects in Lexical Decision naming and semantic categorization tasks interactions between orthography phonology and semantics
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 2002Co-Authors: Yasushi Hino, Stephen J. Lupker, Penny M. PexmanAbstract:In this article, ambiguity and synonymy effects were examined in Lexical Decision, naming, and semantic categorization tasks. Whereas the typical ambiguity advantage was observed in Lexical Decision and naming, an ambiguity disadvantage was observed in semantic categorization. In addition, a synonymy effect (slower latencies for words with many synonyms than for words with few synonyms) was observed in Lexical Decision and naming but not in semantic categorization. These results suggest that (a) an ambiguity disadvantage arises only when a task requires semantic processing, (b) the ambiguity advantage and the synonymy disadvantage in Lexical Decision and naming are due to semantic feedback, and (c) these effects are determined by the nature of the feedback relationships from semantics to
Andrew W Ellis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Real age of acquisition effects in word naming and Lexical Decision
British Journal of Psychology, 2000Co-Authors: Catriona M. Morrison, Andrew W EllisAbstract:Age of acquisition (AoA) has been reported to be a predictor of the speed of reading words aloud (word naming) and Lexical Decision, with early-acquired words being responded to faster than later-acquired words in both tasks. All previous studies of AoA effects have, however, relied upon adult estimates of word learning age the validity of which it is easy to cast doubt upon. Using objective age of acquisition norms derived from children s naming data, this study shows that AoA effects do not depend upon the use of adult ratings In addition to effects of real AoA, influences of word frequency and orthographic neighbourhood size were obtained in both word naming and Lexical Decision. Image ability affected Lexical Decision but not word naming, while the characteristics of the words initial phoneme affected word naming but not Lexical Decision.
-
Contrasting effects of age of acquisition and word frequency on auditory and visual Lexical Decision
Memory and Cognition, 1998Co-Authors: Judith E. Turner, Tim Valentine, Andrew W EllisAbstract:In four experiments, we examined the effects of frequency and age of acquisition on auditory and visual Lexical Decision. Word frequency affected visual, but not auditory, Lexical Decision speed (Experiments 1 and 3). Age of acquisition affected Lexical Decision speed in both modalities (Experiments 2 and 4). We suggest that previous reports of effects of frequency on auditory Lexical Decision may be due to a confounding of frequency with age of acquisition, and we discuss the implications of these findings for theories of auditory and visual word recognition.
