Modulation of additive and interactive effects in lexical decision by trial history

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 898-914

  Masson, Michael E J ^a   Kliegl, Reinhold ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF POTSDAM   (Germany)

Author keywords

Additive and interactive effects; Effects of trial history; Lexical decision; Linear mixed models

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; LINGUISTICS; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS; STATISTICAL MODEL; STUDENT; UNIVERSITY;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS; STUDENTS; UNIVERSITIES; VOCABULARY;

EID: 84880681584     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0029180     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Allain, S., Burle, B., Hasbroucq, T., & Vidal, F. (2009). Sequential adjustments before and after partial errors. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 356-362. doi: 10.3758/PBR.16.2.356
2. Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390-412. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
3. Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Kessler, B., Loftis, B.,.. Treiman, R. (2007). The English Lexicon Project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445-459. doi: 10.3758/BF03193014
4. Becker, C. A. (1979). Semantic context and word-frequency effects in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 252-259. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.5.2.252
5. Becker, C. A., & Killion, T. H. (1977). Interaction of visual and cognitive effects in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 389-401. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.3.3.389
6. Besner, D., & O'Malley, S. (2009). Additivity of factor effects in reading tasks is still a challenge for computational models: Reply to Ziegler, Perry, and Zorzi (2009). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 312-316. doi: 10.1037/a0014555
7. Besner, D., O'Malley, S., & Robidoux, S. (2010). On the joint effects of stimulus quality, regularity, and lexicality when reading aloud: New challenges. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 750-764. doi: 10.1037/a0019178
8. Besner, D., Wartak, S., & Robidoux, S. (2008). Constraints on computational models of basic processes in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 242-250. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.34.1.242
9. Borowsky, R., & Besner, D. (1991). Visual word recognition across orthographies: On the interaction between context and degradation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 272-276. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.17.2.272
10. Borowsky, R., & Besner, D. (1993). Visual word recognition: A multistage activation model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 813-840. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.19.4.813
11. Borowsky, R., & Besner, D. (2006). Parallel distributed processing and lexical-semantic effects in visual word recognition: Are a few stages necessary? Psychological Review, 113, 181-193. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.113.1.181
12. Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108, 624-652. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.624
13. Brown, M., & Besner, D. (2002). Semantic priming: On the role of awareness in visual word recognition in the absence of an expectancy. Consciousness and Cognition, 11, 402-422. doi: 10.1016/S1053-8100(02)00008-9
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., 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. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.1.204
16. Dutilh, G., Vandekerckhove, J., Forstmann, B. U., Keuleers, E., Brysbaert, M., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2012). Testing theories of post-error slowing. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74, 454-465. doi: 10.3758/s13414-011-0243-2
17. Ferguson, R., Robidoux, S., & Besner, D. (2009). Reading aloud: Evidence for contextual control over lexical activation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 499-507. doi: 10.1037/a0013162
18. Kinoshita, S., Forster, K. I., & Mozer, M. C. (2008). Unconscious cognition isn't that smart: Modulation of masked repetition priming effect in the word naming task. Cognition, 107, 623-649. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.11.011
19. Kinoshita, S., Mozer, M. C., & Forster, K. I. (2011). Dynamic adaptation to history of trial difficulty explains the effect of congruency proportion on masked priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 622-636. doi: 10.1037/a0024230
20. Kliegl, R., Masson, M. E. J., & Richter, E. M. (2010). A linear mixed model analysis of masked repetition priming. Visual Cognition, 18, 655-681. doi: 10.1080/13506280902986058
21. Kliegl, R., Wei, P., Dambacher, M., Yan, M., & Zhou, X. (2011). Experimental effects and individual differences in linear mixed models: Estimating the relationship between spatial, object, and attraction effects in visual attention. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, Article 238. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00238
22. Laming, D. (1979). Choice reaction performance following an error. Acta Psychologica, 43, 381-412. doi: 10.1016/0001-6918(79)90032-5
23. Lee, M. D., & Dry, M. J. (2006). Decision making and confidence given uncertain advice. Cognitive Science, 30, 1081-1095. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_71
24. Loftus, G. R., & Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 476-490. doi: 10.3758/BF03210951
25. Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492-527. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.95.4.492
26. Lund, K., & Burgess, C. (1996). Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co-occurrence. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28, 203-208. doi: 10.3758/BF03204766
27. Massaro, D. W., & Cohen, M. M. (1991). Integration versus interactive activation: The joint influence of stimulus and context in perception. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 558-614. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(91) 90006-A
28. Masson, M. E. J., & Loftus, G. R. (2003). Using confidence intervals for graphically based data interpretation. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 57, 203-220. doi: 10.1037/h0087426
29. McClelland, J. L. (1979). On the time relations of mental processes: A framework for analyzing processes in cascade. Psychological Review, 86, 287-330. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.86.4.287
30. Morton, J. (1969). Interaction of information in word recognition. Psychological Review, 76, 165-178. doi: 10.1037/h0027366
31. Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., & Schreiber, T. A. (2004). The University of South Florida word association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 402-407. doi: 10.3758/BF03195588
32. Newell, A., & Rosenbloom, P. S. (1981). Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 1-55). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
33. Newell, B. R., & Lee, M. D. (2011). The right tool for the job? Comparing an evidence accumulation and a näive strategy selection model of decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 24, 456-481. doi: 10.1002/bdm.703
34. O'Malley, S., & Besner, D. (2008). Reading aloud: Qualitative differences in the relation between stimulus quality and word frequency as a function of context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 1400-1411. doi: 10.1037/a0013084
35. O'Malley, S., Reynolds, M. G., & Besner, D. (2007). Qualitative differences between the joint effects of stimulus quality and word frequency in reading aloud and lexical decision: Extensions to Yap and Balota (2007). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 451-458. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.2.451
36. 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. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.114.2.273
37. 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. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.107.4.786
38. Plaut, D. C, & Booth, J. R. (2006). More modeling but still no stages: Reply to Borowsky and Besner. Psychological Review, 113, 196-200. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.113.1.196
39. Quene, H., & van den Bergh, H. (2008). Examples of mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects and with binomial data. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 413-425. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2008.02.002
40. Raaijmakers, J. G. W. (2003). A further look at the "language-as-a-fixed-effect fallacy." Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale, 57, 141-151. doi: 10.1037/h0087421
41. Raaijmakers, J. G. W., Schrijnemakers, J. M. C, & Gremmen, F. (1999). How to deal with "the language-as-a-fixed-effect fallacy": Common misconceptions and alternative solutions. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 416-426. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1999.2650
42. Rabbitt, P. M. A. (1966). Errors and error correction in choice-response tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 264-272. doi: 10.1037/h0022853
43. Rabbitt, P. M. A. (1989). Sequential reactions. In D. H. Holding (Ed.), Human skills (2nd ed., pp. 147-170). Oxford, England: Wiley.
44. Rickard, T. C. (2004). Strategy execution in cognitive skill learning: An item-level test of candidate models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 65-82. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.30.1.65
45. Roberts, S., & Sternberg, S. (1993). The meaning of additive reaction-time effects: Tests of three alternatives. In D. E. Meyer & S. Kornblum (Eds.), Attention and performance XIV: Synergies in experimental psychology, artificial intelligence, and cognitive neuroscience (pp. 611-653). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
46. Robidoux, S., Stolz, J., & Besner, D. (2010). Visual word recognition: Evidence for global and local control over semantic feedback. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 689-703. doi: 10.1037/a0018741
47. Stafford, T., & Gurney, K. N. (2011). Additive factors do not imply discrete processing stages: A worked example using models of the Stroop task. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, Article 287. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00287
48. Stafford, T., Ingram, L., & Gurney, K. N. (2011). Pieron's law holds during Stroop conflict: Insights into the architecture of decision making. Cognitive Science, 35, 1553-1566. doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01195.x
49. Stanners, R. F., Jastrzembski, J. E., & Westbrook, A. (1975). Frequency and visual quality in a word-nonword classification task. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 259-264. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(75)80069-7
50. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1983). On priming by a sentence context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112, 1-36. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.112.1.1
51. Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. Acta Psychologica, 30, 276-315. doi: 10.1016/0001-6918(69)90055-9
52. Stolz, J. A., Besner, D., & Carr, T. H. (2005). Implications of measures of reliability for theories of priming: Activity in semantic memory is inherently noisy and uncoordinated. Visual Cognition, 12, 284-336. doi: 10.1080/13506280444000030
53. Stolz, J. A., & Neely, J. H. (1995). When target degradation does and does not enhance semantic context effects in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 596-611. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.21.3.596
54. Thomas, R. D. (2006). Processing time predictions of current models of perception in the classic additive factors paradigm. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 50, 441-455. doi: 10.1016/j.jmp.2006.05.006
55. Tse, C.-S., & Neely, J. H. (2007). Semantic priming from letter-searched primes occurs for low- but not high-frequency targets: Automatic semantic access may not be a myth. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 1143-1161. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.6.1143
56. Turner, B. M., Van Zandt, T., & Brown, S. (2011). A dynamic stimulus-driven model of signal detection. Psychological Review, 118, 583-613. doi: 10.1037/a0025191
57. Ulrich, R., & Miller, J. (1994). Effects of truncation on reaction time analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 34-80. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.123.1.34
58. Yap, M. J., & Balota, D. A. (2007). Additive and interactive effects on response time distributions in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 274-296. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.2.274
59. Yap, M. J., Balota, D. A., Tse, C.-S., & Besner, D. (2008). On the additive effects of stimulus quality and word frequency in lexical decision: Evidence for opposing interactive influences revealed by RT distributional analyses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 495-513. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.3.495
60. Yap, M. J., Tse, C.-S., & Balota, D. A. (2009). Individual differences in the joint effects of semantic priming and word frequency revealed by RT distributional analyses: The role of lexical integrity. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 303-325. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2009.07.001
61. Ziegler, J. C, Perry, C, & Zorzi, M. (2009). Additive and interactive effects of stimulus degradation: No challenge for CDP+. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 306-311. doi: 10.1037/a0013738