Dynamics of activation of semantically similar concepts during spoken word recognition

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 37, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 1026-1039

  Mirman, Daniel ^a   Magnuson, James S ^b,c  

^a MOSS REHABILITATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^c HASKINS LABORATORIES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE; EYE FIXATION; GAZE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; NORMAL HUMAN; SEMANTICS; SIMULATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; WORD RECOGNITION;

ATTENTION; CONCEPT FORMATION; EYE MOVEMENTS; FIXATION, OCULAR; HUMANS; NONLINEAR DYNAMICS; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SEMANTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 70349755651     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/MC.37.7.1026     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. ALLOPENNA, P. D., MAGNUSON, J. S., & TANENHAUS, M. K. (1998). Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: Evidence for continuous mapping models. Journal of Memory & Language, 38, 419-439.
2. BARSALOU, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 22, 577-660.
3. CHIARELLO, C., BURGESS, C., RICHARDS, L., & POLLOCK, A. (1990). Semantic and associative priming in the cerebral hemispheres: Some words do, some words don't . . . sometimes, some places. Brain & Language, 38, 75-104.
4. COLLINS, A. M., & LOFTUS, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407-428.
5. COOPER, R. M. (1974). The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 84-107.
6. CREE, G. S., & MCRAE, K. (2003). Analyzing the factors underlying the structure and computation of the meaning of chipmunk, cherry, chisel, cheese, and cello (and many other such concrete nouns). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 163-201.
7. CREE, G. S., MCRAE, K., & MCNORGAN, C. (1999). An attractor model of lexical conceptual processing: Simulating semantic priming. Cognitive Science, 23, 371-414.
8. CRYSTAL, T. H., & HOUSE, A. S. (1990). Articulation rate and the duration of syllables and stress groups in connected speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88, 101-112.
9. DAHAN, D., MAGNUSON, J. S., & TANENHAUS, M. K. (2001). Time course of frequency effects in spoken-word recognition: Evidence from eye movements. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 317-367.
10. DAHAN, D., MAGNUSON, J. S., TANENHAUS, M. K., & HOGAN, E. M. (2001). Subcategorical mismatches and the time course of lexical access: Evidence for lexical competition. Language & Cognitive Processes, 16, 507-534.
11. DAHAN, D., & TANENHAUS, M. K. (2005). Looking at the rope when looking for the snake: Conceptually mediated eye movements during spoken-word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 453-459.
12. GOLDSTONE, R. L., LIPPA, Y., & SHIFFRIN, R. M. (2001). Altering object representations through category learning. Cognition, 78, 27-43.
13. HINES, D., CZERWINSKI, M., SAWYER, P. K., & DWYER, M. (1986). Automatic semantic priming: Effect of category exemplar level and word association level. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 12, 370-379.
14. HUETTIG, F., & ALTMANN, G. T. M. (2005). Word meaning and the control of eye fixation: Semantic competitor effects and the visual world paradigm. Cognition, 96, B23-B32. (Pubitemid 40503154)
15. HUETTIG, F., & ALTMANN, G. T. M. (2007). Visual-shape competition during language-mediated attention is based on lexical input and not modulated by contextual appropriateness. Visual Cognition, 15, 985-1018.
16. HUETTIG, F., & MCQUEEN, J. M. (2007). The tug of war between phonological, semantic and shape information in language-mediated visual search. Journal of Memory & Language, 57, 460-482.
17. HUETTIG, F., QUINLAN, P. T., MCDONALD, S. A., & ALTMANN, G. T. M. (2006). Models of high-dimensional semantic space predict language- mediated eye movements in the visual world. Acta Psychologica, 121, 65-80.
18. LANDAUER, T. K., & DUMAIS, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211-240. (Pubitemid 127055496)
19. LUCE, P. A., & PISONI, D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear & Hearing, 19, 1-36.
20. LUCE, R. D. (1959). Individual choice behavior: A theoretical analysis. New York: Wiley.
21. LUND, K., & BURGESS, C. (1996). Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co-occurrence. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28, 203-208.
22. MAGNUSON, J. S., DIXON, J. A., TANENHAUS, M. K., & ASLIN, R. N. (2007). The dynamics of lexical competition during spoken word recognition. Cognitive Science, 31, 133-156.
23. MARKRAM, H., TOLEDO-RODRIGUEZ, M., WANG, Y., GUPTA, A., SILBERBERG, G., & WU, C. (2004). Interneurons of the neocortical inhibitory system. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, 793-807.
24. MARSLEN-WILSON, W. D. (1987). Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition. Cognition, 25, 71-102.
25. MARSLEN-WILSON, W. D., & ZWITSERLOOD, P. (1989). Accessing spoken words: The importance of word onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 15, 576-585.
26. MCCLELLAND, J. L., & ELMAN, J. L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 1-86.
27. MCNAMARA, T. P. (1992). Priming and constraints it places on theories of memory and retrieval. Psychological Review, 99, 650-662.
28. MCRAE, K., & BOISVERT, S. (1998). Automatic semantic similarity priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 24, 558-572.
29. MCRAE, K., CREE, G. S., SEIDENBERG, M. S., & MCNORGAN, C. (2005). Semantic feature production norms for a large set of living and nonliving things. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 547-559.
30. MIRMAN, D., DIXON, J. A., & MAGNUSON, J. S. (2008). Statistical and computational models of the visual world paradigm: Growth curves and individual differences. Journal of Memory & Language, 59, 475-494.
31. MIRMAN, D., & MAGNUSON, J. S. (2008). Attractor dynamics and semantic neighborhood density: Processing is slowed by near neighbors and speeded by distant neighbors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 34, 65-79.
32. NELSON, D. L., MCEVOY, C. L., & SCHREIBER, T. A. (2004). The University of South Florida free association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 402-407.
33. O'CONNOR, C. M., CREE, G. S., & MCRAE, K. (2009). Conceptual hierarchies in a flat attractor network: Dynamics of learning and computations. Cognitive Science, 33, 665-708. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01024.x
34. PEARLMUTTER, B. A. (1995). Gradient calculation for dynamic recurrent neural networks: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 6, 1212-1228.
35. PLAUT, D. C., & BOOTH, J. R. (2000). Individual and developmental differences in semantic priming: Empirical and computational support for a single-mechanism account of lexical processing. Psychological Review, 107, 786-823.
36. REPPEN, R., IDE, N., & SUDERMAN, K. (2005). American National Corpus. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium. http://americannationalcorpus.org/.
37. ROGERS, T. T., & MCCLELLAND, J. L. (2004). Semantic cognition: A parallel distributed processing approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38. SALVERDA, A. P., DAHAN, D., & MCQUEEN, J. M. (2003). The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension. Cognition, 90, 51-89.
39. SHELTON, J. R., & MARTIN, R. C. (1992). How semantic is automatic semantic priming? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 1191-1210.
40. STEYVERS, M., & TENENBAUM, J. B. (2005). The large-scale structure of semantic networks: Statistical analyses and a model of semantic growth. Cognitive Science, 29, 41-78.
41. TANENHAUS, M. K., MAGNUSON, J. S., DAHAN, D., & CHAMBERS, C. (2000). Eye movements and lexical access in spoken-language comprehension: Evaluating a linking hypothesis between fixations and linguistic processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29, 557-580.
42. TANENHAUS, M. K., SPIVEY-KNOWLTON, M. J., EBERHARD, K. M., & SEDIVY, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268, 1632-1634.
43. VIGLIOCCO, G., VINSON, D. P., LEWIS, W., & GARRETT, M. F. (2004). Representing the meanings of object and action words: The featural and unitary semantic space hypothesis. Cognitive Psychology, 48, 422-488.
44. YEE, E., & SEDIVY, J. C. (2006). Eye movements to pictures reveal transient semantic activation during spoken word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 32, 1-14.