Literature DB >> 12198791

Strength of context does modulate the subordinate bias effect: a reply to Binder and Rayner.

G Kellas1, H Vu.   

Abstract

Using a self-paced reading task, Kellas, Martin, Yehling, Herman, and Vu (1995) demonstrated that strength of context can modulate the effects of meaning frequency. Binder and Rayner (1998) initially replicated the results, using eye-tracking methodology. On further examination of the stimuli, Binder and Rayner eliminated 43% of the stimulus set and found that context strength failed to modulate meaning frequency. Binder and Rayner's initial replication of Kellas et al. and the convergence of results between their two main experiments established the validity of self-paced reading as a measure of on-line reading, when compared with eye-tracking methodology. However, their central conclusion, that context strength cannot modulate the subordinate bias effect, is open to question. In this commentary, we examine the criteria adopted to exclude items from our homonym set and discuss the issue of local versus published norms. We also discuss the issue of context strength, as related to the specific rating procedures employed. Finally, we conclude that strong context can, in fact, eliminate the subordinate bias effect and that the context-sensitive model can more fully account for the available data on lexical ambiguity resolution.

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 12198791     DOI: 10.3758/bf03210842

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  5 in total

1.  Strength of discourse context as a determinant of the subordinate bias effect.

Authors:  C Martin; H Vu; G Kellas; K Metcalf
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  1999-11

2.  Influence of contextual features on the activation of ambiguous word meanings.

Authors:  S T Paul; G Kellas; M Martin; M B Clark
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 3.051

3.  Sources of sentence constraint on lexical ambiguity resolution.

Authors:  H Vu; G Kellas; S T Paul
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1998-09

4.  Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity.

Authors:  K Rayner; S A Duffy
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1986-05

5.  University of Alberta norms of relative meaning frequency for 566 homographs.

Authors:  L C Twilley; P Dixon; D Taylor; K Clark
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1994-01
  5 in total
  10 in total

1.  Global context effects on processing lexically ambiguous words: evidence from eye fixations.

Authors:  G Kambe; K Rayner; S A Duffy
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2001-03

2.  LIFG-based attentional control and the resolution of lexical ambiguities in sentence context.

Authors:  Loan C Vuong; Randi C Martin
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  2010-10-23       Impact factor: 2.381

3.  Number-of-features effects and semantic processing.

Authors:  Penny M Pexman; Gregory G Holyk; Marie-H Monfils
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2003-09

4.  Situation-evoking stimuli, domain of reference, and the incremental interpretation of lexical ambiguity.

Authors:  Hoang Vu; George Kellas; Eric Petersen; Kim Metcalf
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2003-12

5.  Processing of the Korean Eojoel ambiguity.

Authors:  Yoonhyoung Lee; Kichun Nam; Peter C Gordon
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2008-12-04

6.  The time course of contextual influences during lexical ambiguity resolution: evidence from distributional analyses of fixation durations.

Authors:  Heather Sheridan; Eyal M Reingold
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2012-10

7.  Revisiting effects of contextual strength on the subordinate bias effect: evidence from eye movements.

Authors:  Jorie Colbert-Getz; Anne E Cook
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2013-11

8.  The divided visual world paradigm: eye tracking reveals hemispheric asymmetries in lexical ambiguity resolution.

Authors:  Aaron M Meyer; Kara D Federmeier
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2008-05-21       Impact factor: 3.252

9.  Does contextual strength modulate the subordinate bias effect? A reply to Kellas and Vu.

Authors:  K S Binder; K Rayner
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1999-09

10.  Dominance and context effects on activation of alternative homophone meanings.

Authors:  Lillian Chen; Julie E Boland
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2008-10
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.