Semantic neighborhood effects on the recognition of ambiguous words

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 505-515

  Locker Jr , Lawrence ^a,b   Simpson, Greg B ^a   Yates, Mark ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS   (United States)

^b NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; NORMAL HUMAN; PHONETICS; SEMANTICS; WORD RECOGNITION;

EID: 0037634197     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03196092     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. ATCHLEY, R. A., BURGESS, C., & KEENEY, M. (1999). The effect of time course and context on the facilitation of semantic features in the cerebral hemispheres. Neuropsychology, 13, 389-403.
2. AZUMA, T., & VAN ORDEN, G. C. (1997). Why safe is better than fast: The relatedness of a word's meaning affects lexical decision times. Journal of Memory & Language, 36, 484-504.
3. BALOTA, D. A., FERRARO, F. R., & CONNOR, L. T. (1991). On the early influence of meaning in word recognition: A review of the literature. In P. J. Schwanenflugel (Ed.), The psychology of word meanings (pp. 187-222). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. BOROWSKY, R., & MASSON, M. E. J. (1996). Semantic ambiguity effects in word identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 63-85.
5. BUCHANAN, L., WESTBURY, C., & BURGESS, C. (2001). Characterizing semantic space: Neighborhood effects in word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 531-544.
6. CLARK, H. H. (1973). The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 15, 261-262.
7. FORSTER, K. I., & BEDNALL, E. S. (1976). Terminating and exhaustive search in lexical access. Memory & Cognition, 4, 53-61.
8. GEE, N. R. (1997). Implicit memory and word ambiguity. Journal of Memory & Language, 36, 253-275.
9. GERNSBACHER, M. A. (1984). Resolving 20 years of inconsistent interactions between lexical familiarity and orthography, concreteness, and polysemy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 256-281.
10. GOTTLOB, L. R., GOLDINGER, S. D., STONE, G. O., & VAN ORDEN, G. C. (1999). Reading homographs: Orthographic, phonologic, and semantic dynamics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25, 561-574.
11. HINO, Y., & LUPKER, S. J. (1996). Effects of polysemy in lexical decision and naming: An alternative to lexical access accounts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, 1331-1356.
12. HINO, Y., LUPKER, S. J., & PEXMAN, P. M. (2002). Ambiguity and synonymy in lexical decision, naming, and semantic categorization tasks: Interactions between orthography, phonology, and semantics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 28, 686-713.
13. JASTRZEMBSKI, J. E. (1981). Multiple meanings, number of related meanings, frequency of occurrence, and the lexicon. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 278-305.
14. JOORDENS, S., & BECKER, S. (1997). The long and short of Semantic priming effects in lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 1083-1105.
15. JOORDENS, S., & BESNER, D. (1994). When banking on meaning is not (yet) money in the bank: Explorations in connectionist modeling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 1051-1062.
16. KAWAMOTO, A. H. (1993). Nonlinear dynamics in the resolution of lexical ambiguity: A parallel distributed processing account. Journal of Memory & Language, 32, 474-516.
17. KAWAMOTO, A. H., FARRAR, W. T., & KELLO, C. T. (1994). When two meanings are better than one: Modeling the ambiguity advantage using a recurrent distributed network. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 1233-1247.
18. KELLAS, G., FERRARO, F. R., & SIMPSON, G. B. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and the timecourse of attentional allocation in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 14, 601-609.
19. KUČERA, H., & FRANCIS, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
20. LUCAS, M. (2000). Semantic priming without association: A meta-analytic review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 618-630.
21. MASSARO, D. W., TAYLOR, G. A., VENEZKY, R. L., JASTRZEMBSKI, J. E., & LUCAS, P. A. (1980). Letter and word perception: The role of orthographic structure and visual processing in reading. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
22. MASSON, M. E. J. (1995). A distributed memory model of semantic priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 3-23.
23. MASSON, M. E. J., & BOROWSKY, R. (1995). Unsettling questions about semantic ambiguity in connectionist models: Comment on Joordens and Besner (1994). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning. Memory, & Cognition, 21, 509-514.
24. MCCLELLAND, J. L., & RUMELHART, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Pt. 1. An account of basic findings, Psychological Review, 88, 375-407.
25. MCRAE, K., DE SA, V. R., & SEIDENBERG, M. S. (1997). On the nature and scope of featural representations of word meaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 99-130.
26. METCALF, K., KELLAS, G., & Vu, H. (1999, November). Limits of contextual constraint on lexical ambiguity resolution. Paper presented at the 40th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Los Angeles.
27. MILLIS, M. L., & BUTTON, S. B. (1989). The effect of polysemy on lexical decision time: Now you see it, now you don't. Memory & Cognition, 17, 141-147.
28. NELSON, D. L., BENNETT, D. J., GEE, N. R., & SCHREIBER, T. A. (1993). Implicit memory: Effects of network size and interconnectivity on cued recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning. Memory, & Cognition, 19, 747-764.
29. NELSON, D. L., McEVOY, C. L., & SCHREIBER, T. A. (1999). The University of South Florida word association, rhyme, and word fragment norms [On-line document]. Available at http://www.usf.edu/FreeAssociation.
30. NELSON, D. L., McEVOY, C. L., WALLING, J. R., & WHEELER, J. W., JR. (1980). The University of South Florida homograph norms. Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 12, 16-37.
31. PECHER, D. (2001). Perception is a two-way junction: Feedback semantics in word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 545-551.
32. PEXMAN, P. M., & LUPKER, S. J. (1999). Ambiguity and visual word recognition: Can feedback explain both homophone and polysemy effects? Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53, 323-334.
33. PEXMAN, P. M., LUPKER, S. J., & HINO, Y. (2002). The impact of feedback semantics in visual word recognition: Number-of-features effects in lexical decision and naming tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 542-549.
34. PIERCEY, C. D., & JOORDENS, S. (2000). Turning an advantage into a disadvantage: Ambiguity effects in lexical decision versus reading tasks. Memory & Cognition, 28, 657-666.
35. PLAUT, D. C. (1997). Structure and function in the lexical system: Insights from distributed models of word reading and lexical decision. Language & Cognitive Processes, 12, 765-805.
36. RAAIJMAKERS, J. G. W., SCHRIJNEMAKERS, J. M. C., & GREMMEN, F. (1999). How to deal with "the language-as-fixed-effect fallacy": Common misconceptions and alternative solutions. Journal of Memory & Language, 41, 416-426.
37. RAYNER, K., & DUFFY, S. A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition, 14, 191-201.
38. RODD, J., GASKELL, G., & MARSLEN-WILSON, W. (2002). Making sense of semantic ambiguity: Semantic competition in lexical access. Journal of Memory & Language, 46, 245-266.
39. RUBENSTEIN, H., GARFIELD, L., & MILLIKAN, J. A. (1970). Homographic entries in the internal lexicon. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 9, 487-494.
40. RUECKL, J. G. (1995). Ambiguity and connectionist networks: Still settling into a solution - commentary on Joordens and Besner (1994). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 501-508.
41. SCHNEIDER, W. (1988). Micro Experimental Laboratory: An integrated system for IBM PC compatibles. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 20, 206-217.
42. SCHREIBER, T. A., & CARTER, K. (in press). The activation of preexisting associations in an episodic memory task. Memory.
43. SIMPSON, G. B., & ADAMOPOULOS, A. (2001). Repeated homographs in word and sentence contexts: Multiple processing of multiple meanings. In D. S. Gorfein (Ed.), On the consequences of meaning selection: Perspectives on resolving lexical ambiguity (pp. 105-117). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
44. SIMPSON, G. B., & BURGESS, C. (1985). Activation and selection processes in the recognition of ambiguous words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 11, 28-39.
45. STRAIN, E., PATTERSON, K., & SEIDENBERG, M. S. (1995). Semantic effects in single-word naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 1140-1154.
46. TWILLEY, L. C., DIXON, P., TAYLOR, D., & CLARK, K. (1994). University of Alberta norms of relative meaning frequency for 566 homographs. Memory & Cognition, 22, 111-126.
47. VAN ORDEN, G. C., & GOLDINGER, S. D. (1994). Interdependence of form and function in cognitive systems explains the perception of printed words. Journal of Experimental. Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 1269-1291.
48. YATES, M. C., LOCKER, L., & SIMPSON, G. B. (2001, November). Investigating the interaction of semantics and phonology in visual word recognition. Paper presented at the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Orlando, FL.