The naming of gender-marked pronouns supports interactivity in models of lexical access;La denominación de pronombres marcados por género corrobora modelos interactivos de acceso al léxico

Psicologica

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 301-321

  Navarrete, Eduardo ^a   Costa, Albert ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TRENTO   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITAT POMPEU FABRA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 73049107963     PISSN: 02112159     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Abrams, L., & Rodríguez, E.L. (2005). Syntactic class influences phonological tip-of-the- tongue resolution. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 1018-1023.
2. Abrams, L., Trunk, D.L., & Merril, L.A. (2007). Why a Superman Cannot Help a Tsunami: Activation of Grammatical Class Influences Resolution of Young and Older Adults' Tip-of-the-Tongue States. Psychology and Aging, 22, 835-845.
3. Badecker, W., Miozzo, M., & Zanuttini, R. (1995). The two-stage model of lexical retrieval: Evidence from a case of anomia with selective preservation of grammatical gender. Cognition, 57, 193-216.
4. Baus, C., Costa, A., & Carreiras, M. (2008). Neighbourhood density and frequency effects in speech production: a case for interactivity. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 866-888.
5. Caramazza, A., (1997). How many levels of processing are there in lexical access? Cognitive, Neuropsychology, 14, 177-208.
6. Caramazza, A., & Miozzo, M. (1997). The relation between syntactic and phonological knowledge in lexical access: Evidence from the "tip-of-the-tongue" phenomenon. Cognition, 64, 309-343.
7. Costa, A., Caramazza, A., & Sebastian-Gallés, N. (2000). The cognate facilitation effect: implications for the models of lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1283-1296.
8. Costa, A., Roelstraete, B., & Hartsuiker, R.J. (2006). The lexical bias effect in bilingual speech production: Evidence for interactivity across languages. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13, 612-617.
9. Dell, G.S., (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93, 283-321.
10. Dell, G. S., Schwartz, M. F., & Martin, N. (1997). Lexical access in aphasic and nonaphasic speakers. Psychological Review, 104, 801-838.
11. Finocchiaro, C., & Caramazza, A. (2006). The production of pronominal clitics: implications for theories of lexical access. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 141-180.
12. Forster, K.I., & Forster, J.C. (2003). DMDX: A windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 35, 116-124.
13. Harley, T.A. (1993). Phonological activation of semantic competitors during lexical access in speech production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 291-309.
14. Janssen, N., Alario, F.-X., & Caramazza, A. (2008). A word-order constraint on phonological activation. Psychological Science, 19, 216-220.
15. Jescheniak, J.D., Schriefers, H.J., & Hantsch, A. (2001). Semantic and phonological activation in noun and pronoun production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 1058-1078.
16. Jescheniak, J.D, Schriefers, H., Hantsch, A. (2003). Utterance format affects phonological priming in the picture-word task: Implications for models of phonological encoding in speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 441-454.
17. Leek, E. C., Tainturier, M. J., & Wyn, R., (2003). Syntactic mediation is not obligatory in lexical access: Evidence from a single-case study of Welsh aphasia. Brain and Cognition, 53, 268-272.
18. Levelt, W.J.M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A.S. (1999a). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 22, 1-75.
19. Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999b). Multiple perspectives on word production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 61-75.
20. Miozzo, M., & Caramazza, A. (1997). The retrieval of lexical-syntactic features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 1410-1423.
21. Navarrete, E., & Costa, A. (2005). Phonological activation of ignored pictures: Further evidence for a cascade model of lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 359-377.
22. Pallier, C., Dupoux, E., & Jeannin, X. (1997). EXPE: An expandable programming language for on-line psychological experiments. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 29, 322-327.
23. Oppermann, F., Jescheniak, J.D., Schriefers, H. (2008). Conceptual coherence affects phonological activation of context objects during object naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 34, 587-601.
24. Rapp, B. & Goldrick, M. (2000). Discreteness and interactivity in spoken word production. Psychological Review, 107, 460-499.
25. Schmitt, B. Meyer, A., & Levelt, W.J.M., (1999). Lexical access in the production of pronouns. Cognition, 69, 313-335.
26. Schriefers, H., Meyer, A.S., & Levelt, W.J.M. (1990). Exploring the time course of lexical access in language production: picture-word interference studies. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 86-102.
27. Snodgrass, J. G., & Vanderwart, M. (1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 174-215.
28. Starreveld, P.A., & La Heij, W. (2004). Phonological facilitation of grammatical gender retrieval. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 677-711.
29. Tainturier, M.J., Leek, E.C., Schiemenz, S., Williams, C.A., Thomas, E., Gathercole, V.C. (2006). Access to lexical phonology does not predict retrieval of grammatical gender in Welsh: Implications for theories of language production. Brain and language, 95, 52-53
30. Vigliocco, G., & Franck, J. (1999). When sex and syntax go hand in hand: Gender agreement in language production. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 455-478.