Ease of Processing Constrains the Activation Flow in the Conceptual-Lexical System During Speech Planning

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 37, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 649-660

  Mädebach, Andreas ^a   Jescheniak, Jörg D ^a   Oppermann, Frank ^a   Schriefers, Herbert ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG   (Germany)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Phonological context effects; Picture naming; Picture word interference paradigm; Speech production

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; CONCEPT FORMATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; PHONETICS; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION; SEMANTICS; SPEECH;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTENTION; CONCEPT FORMATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; PHONETICS; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SEMANTICS; SPEECH; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79955746523     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0022330     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Alario F.X., Ferrand L., Laganaro M., New B., Frauenfelder U.H., Segui J. Predictors of picture naming speed. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 2004, 36:140-155.
2. Baayen R.H., Piepenbrock R., van Rijn H. The CELEX lexical database [CD-ROM] 1993, Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
3. Barry C., Morrison C.M., Ellis A.W. Naming the Snodgrass and Vanderwart pictures: Effects of age of acquisition, frequency, and name agreement. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1997, 50:560-585. doi: 10.1080/027249897392026.
4. Biederman I. Recognition-by-components. A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review 1987, 94:115-147. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.94.2.115.
5. Bloem I., La Heij W. Semantic facilitation and semantic interference in word translation: Implications for models of lexical access in language production. Journal of Memory and Language 2003, 48:468-488. doi: 10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00503-X.
6. Bloem I., van den Boogaard S., La Heij W. Semantic facilitation and semantic interference in language production: Further evidence for the conceptual selection model of lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language 2004, 51:307-323. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2004.05.001.
7. Cook A.E., Meyer A. Capacity demands of phoneme selection in word production: New evidence from dual-task experiments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2008, 34:886-899. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.4.886.
8. Damian M.F., Martin R.C. Semantic and phonological codes interact in single word production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1999, 25:345-361. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.25.2.345.
9. Dell G.S. A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review 1986, 93:283-321. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.283.
10. Dell G.S., Reich P.A. Stages in sentence production: An analysis of speech error data. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior 1981, 20:611-629. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90202-4.
11. Dell G.S., Schwartz M.F., Martin N., Saffran E.M., Gagnon D.A. Lexical access in aphasic and nonaphasic speakers. Psychological Review 1997, 104:801-838. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.104.4.801.
12. Goldrick M. Limited interaction in speech production: Chronometric, speech error, and neuropsychological evidence. Language and Cognitive Processes 2006, 21:817-855. doi: 10.1080/01690960600824112.
13. Goldrick M., Dell G.S., Kroll J., Rapp B. Sequential information processing and limited interaction in language production [Letter]. Science 2009, December 4, Retrieved from http://www.sciencemag.org/content/326/5951/445/reply#sci_el_12834.
14. Griffin Z.M. Gaze durations during speech reflect word selection and phonological encoding. Cognition 2001, 82:B1-B14. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00138-X.
15. Harley T.A. A critique of top-down independent levels models of speech production: Evidence from non-plan-internal speech errors. Cognitive Science 1984, 8:191-219. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog0803_1.
16. Humphreys G.W., Riddoch M.J., Quinlan P.T. Cascade processes in picture identification. Cognitive Neuropsychology 1988, 5:67-104. doi: 10.1080/02643298808252927.
17. Jescheniak J.D., Hahne A., Hoffmann S., Wagner V. Phonological activation of category coordinates during speech planning is observable in children but not in adults: Evidence for cascaded processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2006, 32:373-386. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.32.3.373.
18. Jescheniak J.D., Hahne A., Schriefers H. Information flow in the mental lexicon during speech planning: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Cognitive Brain Research 2003, 15:261-276. doi: 10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00198-2.
19. Jescheniak J.D., Hantsch A., Schriefers H. Context effects on lexical choice and activation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2005, 31:905-920. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.31.5.905.
20. Jescheniak J.D., Levelt W.J.M. Word-frequency effects in speech production: Retrieval of syntactic information and of phonological form. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1994, 20:824-843. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.20.4.824.
21. Jescheniak J.D., Oppermann F., Hantsch A., Wagner V., Mädebach A., Schriefers H. Do perceived context pictures automatically activate their phonological code?. Experimental Psychology 2009, 56:56-65. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169.56.1.56.
22. Jescheniak J.D., Schriefers H. Discrete serial versus cascaded processing in lexical access in speech production: Further evidence from the coactivation of near-synonyms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1998, 24:1256-1274. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.24.5.1256.
23. Jescheniak J.D., Schriefers H., Garrett M.F., Friederici A.D. Exploring the activation of semantic and phonological codes during speech planning with event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2002, 14:951-964. doi: 10.1162/089892902760191162.
24. Jescheniak J.D., Schriefers H., Hantsch A. Semantic and phonological activation in noun and pronoun production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 2001, 27:1058-1078. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.27.4.1058.
25. Klemen J., Büchel C., Rose M. Perceptual load interacts with stimulus processing across sensory modalities. European Journal of Neuroscience 2009, 29:2426-2434. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2009.06774.x.
26. Kuipers J., La Heij W. The limitations of cascading in the speech production system. Language and Cognitive Processes 2009, 24:120-135. doi: 10.1080/01690960802234177.
27. Lavie N. Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1995, 21:451-468. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.21.3.451.
28. Lavie N. Distracted and confused? Selective attention under load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2005, 9:75-82. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.12.004.
29. Lavie N., Tsal Y. Perceptual load as a major determinant of the locus of selection in visual attention. Perception & Psychophysics 1994, 56:183-197.
30. Levelt W.J.M., Roelofs A., Meyer A.S. A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1999, 22:1-38. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X99001776.
31. Levelt W.J.M., Schriefers H., Vorberg D., Meyer A.S., Pechmann T., Havinga J. The time course of lexical access in speech production: A study of picture naming. Psychological Review 1991, 98:122-142. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.98.1.122.
32. Malpass D., Meyer A.S. Parallel processing of objects in a naming task: Evidence from extrafoveal-on-foveal effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 2010, 36:523-537. doi: 10.1037/a0018522.
33. Meyer A.S., Damian M.F. Activation of distractor names in the picture-picture interference paradigm. Memory & Cognition 2007, 35:494-503.
34. Meyer A.S., Ouellet M., Häcker C. Parallel processing of objects in a naming task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2008, 34:982-987. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.4.982.
35. Meyer A.S., Sleiderink A.M., Levelt W.J.M. Viewing and naming objects: Eye movements during noun phrase production. Cognition 1998, 66:B25-B33. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00009-2.
36. Morgan J.L., Meyer A.S. Processing of extrafoveal objects during multiple-object naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2005, 31:428-442. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.31.3.428.
37. Morgan J.L., Van Elswijk G., Meyer A.S. Extrafoveal processing of objects in a naming task: Evidence from word probe experiments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2008, 15:561-565. doi: 10.3758/PBR.15.3.561.
38. Morsella E., Miozzo M. Evidence for a cascade model of lexical access in speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2002, 28:555-563. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.28.3.555.
39. Mortensen L., Meyer A.S., Humphreys G.W. Speech planning during multiple-object naming: Effects of aging. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2008, 61:1217-1238. doi: 10.1080/17470210701467912.
40. Navarrete E., Costa A. Phonological activation of ignored pictures: Further evidence for a cascade model of lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language 2005, 53:359-377. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2005.05.001.
41. Oldfield R.C., Wingfield A. Response latencies in naming objects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1965, 17:273-281. doi: 10.1080/17470216508416445.
42. Oppermann F., Jescheniak J.D., Schriefers H. Conceptual coherence affects phonological activation of context objects during object naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2008, 34:587-601. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.3.587.
43. Oppermann F., Jescheniak J.D., Schriefers H., Görges F. Semantic relatedness among objects promotes the activation of multiple phonological codes during object naming. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2010, 63:356-370. doi: 10.1080/17470210902952480.
44. Peterson R.R., Savoy P. Lexical selection and phonological encoding during language production: Evidence for cascaded processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1998, 24:539-557. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.24.3.539.
45. Rapp B., Goldrick M. Discreteness and interactivity in spoken word production. Psychological Review 2000, 107:460-499. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.107.3.460.
46. Rees G., Frith C., Lavie N. Processing of irrelevant visual motion during performance of an auditory attention task. Neuropsychologia 2001, 39:937-949. doi: 10.1016/S0028-3932(01)00016-1.
47. Roelofs A. Attention and gaze control in picture naming, word reading, and word categorizing. Journal of Memory and Language 2007, 57:232-251. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2006.10.001.
48. Roelofs A. Tracing attention and the activation flow in spoken word planning using eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2008, 34:353-368. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.2.353.
49. Sahin N.T., Pinker S., Cash S.S., Schomer D., Halgren E. Sequential processing of lexical, grammatical, and phonological information within Broca's area. Science 2009, 326:445-449. doi: 10.1126/science.1174481.
50. Schriefers H., Meyer A.S., Levelt W.J.M. Exploring the time course of lexical access in language production: Picture-word interference studies. Journal of Memory and Language 1990, 29:86-102. doi: 10.1016/0749-596X(90)90011-N.
51. Snodgrass J.G., Yuditsky T. Naming times for the Snodgrass and Vanderwart pictures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 1996, 28:516-536.
52. Starreveld P.A., La Heij W. Semantic interference, orthographic facilitation, and their interaction in naming tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1995, 21:686-698. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.21.3.686.
53. Tellinghuisen D.J., Nowak E.J. The inability to ignore auditory distractors as a function of visual task perceptual load. Perception & Psychophysics 2003, 65:817-828.
54. Vigliocco G., Vinson D.P., Martin R.C., Garrett M.F. Is " count" and " mass" information available when the noun is not? An investigation of tip of the tongue states and anomia. Journal of Memory and Language 1999, 40:534-558. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1998.2626.