Competition and cooperation among similar representations: Toward a unified account of facilitative and inhibitory effects of lexical neighbors

Psychological Review

Volumn 119, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 417-430

  Chen, Qi ^a   Mirman, Daniel ^a  

^a MOSS REHABILITATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Competition; Interactive activation; Language processing; Lexical processing; Neighbor effects; Neighborhood effects

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; REACTION TIME; STATISTICS; VISION;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PATTERN RECOGNITION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; REACTION TIME; VISUAL PERCEPTION; VOCABULARY;

EID: 84864308374     PISSN: 0033295X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0027175     Document Type: Article

References (94)

1. Acha, J., & Perea, M. (2008). The effect of neighborhood frequency in reading: Evidence with transposed-letter neighbors. Cognition, 108, 290-300. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.02.006
2. 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 and Language, 38, 419-439. doi:10.1006/jmla.1997.2558
3. Andrews, S. (1989). Frequency and neighborhood effects on lexical access: Activation or search? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 802-814. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.15.5.802
4. Andrews, S. (1992). Frequency and neighborhood effects on lexical access: Lexical similarity or orthographic redundancy? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 234-254. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.18.2.234.
5. Andrews, S. (1996). Lexical retrieval and selection processes: Effects of transposed-letter confusability. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 775-800. doi:10.1006/jmla.1996.0040
6. Andrews, S. (1997). The effect of orthographic similarity on lexical retrieval: Resolving neighborhood conflicts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 439-461. doi:10.3758/BF03214334
7. Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H., & Yap, M. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 283-316. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.2.283
8. Benkí, J. R. (2003). Quantitative evaluation of lexical status, word frequency, and neighborhood density as context effects in spoken word recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113, 1689-1705. doi:10.1121/1.1534102
9. Botvinick, M. M., Buxbaum, L. J., Bylsma, L. M., & Jax, S. A. (2009). Toward an integrated account of object and action selection: A computational analysis and empirical findings from reaching-to-grasp and tool-use. Neuropsychologia, 47, 671-683. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.11.024
10. Boyczuk, J. P., & Baum, S. R. (1999). The influence of neighborhood density on phonetic categorization in aphasia. Brain and Language, 67, 46-70. doi:10.1006/brln.1998.2049
11. Buchanan, L., Westbury, C., & Burgess, C. (2001). Characterizing semantic space: Neighborhood effects in word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 531-544. doi:10.3758/BF03196189
12. Chan, K. Y., & Vitevitch, M. S. (2009). The influence of the phonological neighborhood clustering coefficient on spoken word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1934-1949. doi:10.1037/a0016902
13. Cisek, P. (2006). Integrated neural processes for defining potential actions and deciding between them: A computational model. Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 9761-9770. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5605-05.2006
14. Cohen, J. D., Dunbar, K., & McClelland, J. L. (1990). On the control of automatic processes: A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. Psychological Review, 97, 332-361. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.97.3.332
15. Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, J., & Besner, D. (1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance VI (pp. 535-555). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204-256.
17. 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. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.132.2.163
18. Cree, G. S., McRae, K., & McNorgan, C. (1999). An attractor model of lexical conceptual processing: Simulating semantic priming. Cognitive Science, 23, 371-414. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2303_4
19. 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. doi:10.1006/cogp.2001.0750
20. Davis, C. J. (2010). The spatial coding model of visual word identification. Psychological Review, 117, 713-758.
21. Davis, C. J., Perea, M., & Acha, J. (2009). Re(de)fining the orthographic neighborhood: The role of addition and deletion neighbors in lexical decision and reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1550-1570. doi:10.1037/a0014253
22. Dell, G. S., & Gordon, J. K. (2003). Neighbors in the lexicon: Friends or foes? In N. O. Schiller & A. S. Meyer (Eds.), Phonetics and phonology in language comprehension and production: Differences and similarities (pp. 9-38). Boston, MA: de Gruyter Mouton. doi:10.1515/9783110895094.9
23. Dell, G. S., Schwartz, M. F., Martin, N., Saffran, E. M., & Gagnon, D. A. (1997). Lexical access in aphasic and nonaphasic speakers. Psychological Review, 104, 801-838. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.104.4.801
24. Dufour, S., & Peereman, R. (2003a). Inhibitory priming effects in auditory word recognition: When the target's competitors conflict with the prime word. Cognition, 88, B33-B44. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00046-5
25. Dufour, S., & Peereman, R. (2003b). Lexical competition in phonological priming: Assessing the role of phonological match and mismatch lengths between primes and targets. Memory & Cognition, 31, 1271-1283. doi:10.3758/BF03195810
26. Duñabeitia, J. A., Avilés, A., & Carreiras, M. (2008). NoA's ark: Influence of the number of associates in visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 1072-1077. doi:10.3758/PBR.15.6.1072
27. Ferraro, F. R., & Hansen, C. L. (2002). Orthographic neighborhood size, number of word meanings, and number of higher frequency neighbors. Brain and Language, 82, 200-205. doi:10.1016/S0093-934X(02)00016-0
28. Forster, K. I., & Shen, D. (1996). No enemies in the neighborhood: Absence of inhibitory neighborhood effects in lexical decision and semantic categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 696-713. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.22.3.696
29. Garlock, V. M., Walley, A. C., & Metsala, J. L. (2001). Age-of-acquisition, word frequency, and neighborhood density effects on spoken word recognition by children and adults. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 468-492. doi:10.1006/jmla.2000.2784
30. Gaskell, M. G., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1997). Integrating form and meaning: A distributed model of speech perception. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 613-656. doi:10.1080/016909697386646
31. Goldinger, S. D., Luce, P. A., & Pisoni, D. B. (1989). Priming lexical neighbors of spoken words: Effects of competition and inhibition. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 501-518. doi:10.1016/0749596X(89)90009-0
32. Goldrick, M., Folk, J. R., & Rapp, B. (2010). Mrs. Malaprop's neighborhood: Using word errors to reveal neighborhood structure. Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 113-134. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.11.008
33. Gordon, J. K. (2002). Phonological neighborhood effects in aphasic speech errors: Spontaneous and structured contexts. Brain and Language, 82, 113-145. doi:10.1016/S0093-934X(02)00001-9
34. Grainger, J. (1990). Word frequency and neighborhood frequency effects in lexical decision and naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 228-244.
35. Grainger, J. (2008). Cracking the orthographic code: An introduction. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 1-35. doi:10.1080/01690960701578013
36. Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review, 103, 518-565. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.103.3.518
37. Grainger, J., O'Regan, J. K., Jacobs, A. M., & Segui, J. (1989). On the role of competing word units in visual word recognition: The neighborhood frequency effect. Perception & Psychophysics, 45, 189-195. doi: 10.3758/BF03210696
38. Grainger, J., O'Regan, J. K., Jacobs, A. M., & Segui, J. (1992). Neighborhood frequency effects and letter visibility in visual word recognition. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 49-56. doi:10.3758/BF03205073
39. Grainger, J., & Segui, J. (1990). Neighborhood frequency effects in visual word recognition: A comparison of lexical decision and masked identification latencies. Perception & Psychophysics, 47, 191-198. doi: 10.3758/BF03205983
40. Griffiths, T. L., Kemp, C., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2008). Bayesian models of cognition. In R. Sun (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of computational psychology (pp. 59-100). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
41. Harley, T. A., & Brown, H. E. (1998). What causes a tip-of-the-tongue state? Evidence for lexical neighbourhood effects in speech production. British Journal of Psychology, 89, 151-174. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1998.tb02677.x
42. Jacobs, A. M., & Grainger, J. (1994). Models of visual word recognition: Sampling the state of the art. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 1311-1332.
43. Johnson, N. F., & Pugh, K. R. (1994). A cohort model of visual word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 26, 240-346. doi:10.1006/cogp.1994.1008
44. Johnson, R. L. (2009). The quiet clam is quite calm: Transposed-letter neighborhood effects on eye movements during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 943-969. doi:10.1037/a0015572
45. Kalish, M. L., Lewandowsky, S., & Kruschke, J. K. (2004). Population of linear experts: Knowledge partitioning and function learning. Psychological Review, 111, 1072-1099. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.111.4.1072
46. Kittredge, A. K., Dell, G. S., Verkuilen, J., & Schwartz, M. F. (2008). Where is the effect of frequency in word production? Insights from aphasic picture-naming errors. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 25, 463-492. doi:10.1080/02643290701674851
47. Lipinski, J., & Gupta, P. (2005). Does neighborhood density influence repetition latency for nonwords? Separating the effects of density and duration. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 171-192. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2004.10.004
48. Locker, L., Simpson, G. B., & Yates, M. (2003). Semantic neighborhood effects on the recognition of ambiguous words. Memory & Cognition, 31, 505-515. doi:10.3758/BF03196092
49. Luce, P. A. (1986). Neighborhoods of words in the mental lexicon: Research on speech perception (Technical Report No. 6). Bloomington, IN: Speech Research Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Indiana University.
50. Luce, P. A., & Large, N. R. (2001). Phonotactics, density, and entropy in spoken word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16, 565-581. doi:10.1080/01690960143000137
51. Luce, P. A., & Pisoni, D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing, 19, 1-36. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199802000-00001
52. Luce, R. D. (1959). Individual choice behavior. Oxford, England: Wiley.
53. 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. doi:10.1080/03640210709336987.
54. Magnuson, J. S., & Mirman, D. (2007). Neighborhood effects in word recognition: It's not where you live, it's how you get home. Paper presented at the 48th annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Long Beach, CA.
55. Magnuson, J. S., Tanenhaus, M. K., Aslin, R. N., & Dahan, D. (2003). The time course of spoken word learning and recognition: Studies with artificial lexicons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 202-227. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.132.2.202
56. Mathey, S., & Zagar, D. (2000). The neighborhood distribution effect in visual word recognition: Words with single and twin neighbors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 184-205. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.26.1.184
57. McClelland, J. L. (1993). Toward a theory of information processing in graded, random, and interactive networks. In D. E. Meyer & S. Kornblum (Eds.), Attention & Performance XIV: Synergies in experimental psychology, artificial intelligence and cognitive neuroscience (pp. 655-688). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
58. McClelland, J. L., & Elman, J. L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 1-86. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(86)90015-0
59. McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.88.5.375
60. McRae, K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 283-312. doi:10.1006/jmla.1997.2543
61. Medin, D. L., & Schaffer, M. M. (1978). Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review, 85, 207-238. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.85.3.207
62. Middleton, E. L., & Schwartz, M. F. (2010). Density pervades: An analysis of phonological neighbourhood density effects in aphasic speakers with different types of naming impairment. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 27, 401-427. doi:10.1080/02643294.2011.570325
63. Mirman, D. (2011). Effects of near and distant semantic neighbors on word production. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 11, 32-43. doi:10.3758/s13415-010-0009-7
64. 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 and Language, 59, 475-494. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.006
65. Mirman, D., Kittredge, A. K., & Dell, G. S. (2010). Effects of near and distant phonological neighbors on picture naming. In S. Ohlsson & R. Catrambone (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1447-1452). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
66. 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, and Cognition, 34, 65-79. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.34.1.65
67. Mirman, D., Yee, E., Blumstein, S. E., & Magnuson, J. S. (2011). Theories of spoken word recognition deficits in aphasia: Evidence from eye-tracking and computational modeling. Brain and Language, 117, 53-68. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2011.01.004
68. Mulatti, C., Reynolds, M. G., & Besner, D. (2006). Neighborhood effects in reading aloud: New findings and new challenges for computational models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 799-810. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.32.4.799
69. Newman, R. S., Sawusch, J. R., & Luce, P. A. (1997). Lexical neighbor-hood effects in phonetic processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 873-889. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.23.3.873
70. Palmeri, T. J., Wong, A. C.-N., & Gauthier, I. (2004). Computational approaches to the development of perceptual expertise. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 378-386. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2004.06.001
71. Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2007). Nested incremental modeling in the development of computational theories: The CDP+ model of reading aloud. Psychological Review, 114, 273-315.
72. Pitt, M. A., Kim, W., Navarro, D. J., & Myung, J. I. (2006). Global model analysis by parameter space partitioning. Psychological Review, 113, 57-83. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.113.1.57
73. Plaut, D. C., McClelland, J. L., Seidenberg, M. S., & Patterson, K. (1996). Understanding normal and impaired word reading: Computational principles in quasi-regular domains. Psychological Review, 103, 56-115. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.103.1.56
74. Polyn, S. M., Norman, K. A., & Kahana, M. J. (2009). A context maintenance and retrieval model of organizational processes in free recall. Psychological Review, 116, 129-156. doi:10.1037/a0014420
75. Rogers, T. T., & McClelland, J. L. (2004). Semantic cognition: A parallel distributed processing approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
76. Roodenrys, S., & Hinton, M. (2002). Sublexical or lexical effects on serial recall of nonwords? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 29-33. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.28.1.29
77. Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1982). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: II. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model. Psychological Review, 89, 60-94. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.89.1.60
78. Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J. L., & the Parallel Distributed Processing Research Group. (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
79. Sears, C. R., Hino, Y., & Lupker, S. J. (1995). Neighborhood size and neighborhood frequency effects in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 876-900. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.21.4.876
80. Siakaluk, P. D., Buchanan, L., & Westbury, C. (2003). The effect of semantic distance in yes/no and go/no-go semantic categorization tasks. Memory & Cognition, 31, 100-113. doi:10.3758/BF03196086
81. Taraban, R., & McClelland, J. L. (1987). Conspiracy effects in word pronunciation. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 608-631. doi: 10.1016/0749-596X(87)90105-7
82. Usher, M., & McClelland, J. L. (2001). The time course of perceptual choice: The leaky, competing accumulator model. Psychological Review, 108, 550-592. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.550
83. Vitevitch, M. S. (1997). The neighborhood characteristics of malapropisms. Language and Speech, 40, 211-228.
84. Vitevitch, M. S. (2002). The influence of phonological similarity neighborhoods on speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 735-747. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.28.4.735
85. Vitevitch, M. S. (2007). The spread of the phonological neighborhood influences spoken word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 35, 166-175. doi:10.3758/BF03195952
86. Vitevitch, M. S., & Luce, P. A. (1998). When words compete: Levels of processing in perception of spoken words. Psychological Science, 9, 325-329. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00064
87. Vitevitch, M. S., & Luce, P. A. (1999). Probabilistic phonotactics and neighborhood activation in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 374-408. doi:10.1006/jmla.1998.2618
88. Vitevitch, M. S., Luce, P. A., Pisoni, D. B., & Auer, E. T. (1999). Phonotactics, neighborhood activation, and lexical access for spoken words. Brain and Language, 68, 306-311. doi:10.1006/brln.1999.2116
89. Vitevitch, M. S., & Sommers, M. S. (2003). The facilitative influence of phonological similarity and neighborhood frequency in speech production in younger and older adults. Memory & Cognition, 31, 491-504. doi:10.3758/BF03196091
90. Yarkoni, T., Balota, D., & Yap, M. (2008). Moving beyond Coltheart's N: A new measure of orthographic similarity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 971-979. doi:10.3758/PBR.15.5.971
91. Yates, M. (2005). Phonological neighbors speed visual word processing: Evidence from multiple tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1385-1397. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.31.6.1385
92. Yates, M., Friend, J., & Ploetz, D. M. (2008). Phonological neighbors influence word naming through the least supported phoneme. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1599-1608. doi:10.1037/a0011633
93. Yates, M., Locker, L., & Simpson, G. B. (2003). Semantic and phonological influences on the processing of words and pseudohomophones. Memory & Cognition, 31, 856-866. doi:10.3758/BF03196440
94. Yates, M., Locker, L., & Simpson, G. B. (2004). The influence of phonological neighborhood on visual word perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 452-457. doi:10.3758/BF03196594