Literature DB >> 28663604

A rose by any other name is still a rose: A reinterpretation of Hantsch and Mädebach.

Eduardo Navarrete1, Bradford Z Mahon2,3.   

Abstract

The Response Exclusion Hypothesis localises the semantic interference effect as observed in the picture-word paradigm at a postlexical level of processing. An important aspect of this proposal is that the ease with which distractor words can be excluded from production at the response level is determined by the degree to which they satisfy criteria demanded of a correct response. This proposal predicts that naming a picture of a "rose" with the response "flower" will be slower with the distractor "rose" than a distractor word that would not be appropriate for the picture (e.g., "tulip"). Hantsch and Mädebach report evidence consistent with this expectation; however, the authors argue that the results are problematic for the Response Exclusion Hypothesis. Here we unpack Hantsch and Mädebach's arguments about why their finding is (putatively) problematic for the Response Exclusion Hypothesis. We conclude that the pattern of effects that the authors report are not only in line with what would be expected by the Response Exclusion Hypothesis, but are difficult to reconcile with Hantsch and Mädebach's preferred theoretical position.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Lexical selection; Picture–word interference; Response Exclusion Hypothesis; Speech production

Year:  2012        PMID: 28663604      PMCID: PMC5487006          DOI: 10.1080/01690965.2012.682071

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lang Cogn Process        ISSN: 0169-0965


  35 in total

Review 1.  A theory of lexical access in speech production.

Authors:  W J Levelt; A Roelofs; A S Meyer
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 12.579

2.  Locus of semantic interference in picture-word interference tasks.

Authors:  Markus F Damian; Jeffrey S Bowers
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2003-03

3.  The distractor frequency effect in picture-word interference: Evidence for response exclusion.

Authors:  Elisah Dhooge; Robert J Hartsuiker
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 4.  A spreading-activation theory of lemma retrieval in speaking.

Authors:  A Roelofs
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1992-03

5.  Don't talk about pink elephants! Speaker's control over leaking private information during language production.

Authors:  Liane Wardlow Lane; Michelle Groisman; Victor S Ferreira
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2006-04

6.  Now you see it, now you don't: on turning semantic interference into facilitation in a Stroop-like task.

Authors:  Matthew Finkbeiner; Alfonso Caramazza
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.027

7.  Tracing attention and the activation flow of spoken word planning using eye movements.

Authors:  Ardi Roelofs
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 3.051

8.  Components of Stroop-like interference in picture naming.

Authors:  W La Heij
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1988-09

9.  Pictures and names: making the connection.

Authors:  P Jolicoeur; M A Gluck; S M Kosslyn
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1984-04       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Semantic similarity and grammatical class in naming actions.

Authors:  Gabriella Vigliocco; David P Vinson; Simona Siri
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2005-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.