Literature DB >> 18605876

Capacity demands of phoneme selection in word production: new evidence from dual-task experiments.

Amy E Cook1, Antje S Meyer.   

Abstract

Three dual-task experiments investigated the capacity demands of phoneme selection in picture naming. On each trial, participants named a target picture (Task 1) and carried out a tone discrimination task (Task 2). To vary the time required for phoneme selection, the authors combined the targets with phonologically related or unrelated distractor pictures (Experiment 1) or words, which were clearly visible (Experiment 2) or masked (Experiment 3). When pictures or masked words were presented, the tone discrimination and picture naming latencies were shorter in the related condition than in the unrelated condition, which indicates that phoneme selection requires central processing capacity. However, when the distractor words were clearly visible, the facilitatory effect was confined to the picture naming latencies. This pattern arose because the visible related distractor words facilitated phoneme selection but slowed down speech monitoring processes that had to be completed before the response to the tone could be selected. (c) 2008 APA

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18605876     DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.4.886

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn        ISSN: 0278-7393            Impact factor:   3.051


  14 in total

1.  Attention demands of language production in adults who stutter.

Authors:  Nathan D Maxfield; Wendy L Olsen; Daniel Kleinman; Stefan A Frisch; Victor S Ferreira; Jennifer J Lister
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 3.708

2.  Effect of response context and masker type on word recognition in school-age children and adults.

Authors:  Emily Buss; Lori J Leibold; Joseph W Hall
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  The Influence of Executive Functions on Phonemic Processing in Children Who Do and Do Not Stutter.

Authors:  Jayanthi Sasisekaran; Shriya Basu
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  Motor movement matters: the flexible abstractness of inner speech.

Authors:  Gary M Oppenheim; Gary S Dell
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2010-12

5.  The exception does not rule: attention constrains form preparation in word production.

Authors:  Pádraig G O'Séaghdha; Alexandra K Frazer
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2014-02-17       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  Resolving semantic interference during word production requires central attention.

Authors:  Daniel Kleinman
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2013-06-17       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  What Phonological Facilitation Tells about Semantic Interference: A Dual-Task Study.

Authors:  Pauline Ayora; Francesca Peressotti; F-Xavier Alario; Claudio Mulatti; Patrick Pluchino; Remo Job; Roberto Dell'acqua
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-04-06

8.  Effects of speech rate and practice on the allocation of visual attention in multiple object naming.

Authors:  Antje S Meyer; Linda Wheeldon; Femke van der Meulen; Agnieszka Konopka
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-02-20

9.  Attention demands of spoken word planning: a review.

Authors:  Ardi Roelofs; Vitória Piai
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-11-07

10.  Effects of concurrent task demands on language planning in fluent children and adults.

Authors:  Jayanthi Sasisekaran; Cara Donohue
Journal:  Appl Psycholinguist       Date:  2015-12-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.