I see/hear what you mean: Semantic activation in visual word recognition depends on perceptual attention

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Volumn 143, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 527-533

  Connell, Louise ^a,b   Lynott, Dermot ^c  

^a LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^c LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Perceptual attention; Perceptual strength; Semantics; Visual word recognition

Indexed keywords

ATTENTION; COMPREHENSION; HEARING; HUMAN; READING; RECOGNITION; SEMANTICS; VISION;

ATTENTION; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; COMPREHENSION; HUMANS; READING; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SEMANTICS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 84897572837     PISSN: 00963445     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0034626     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H., & Yap, M. J. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 283-316.
2. Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Hutchison, K. A.,&Cortese, M. J. (2012). Megastudies: What do millions (or so) of trials tell us about lexical processing? In J. S. Adelman (Ed.), Visual word recognition (Vol. 1, pp. 90-115). London, England: Psychology Press.
3. Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Cortese, M. J., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., . . . Treiman, R. (2007). The English lexicon project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445-459.
4. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577-660.
5. Brown, G. D.,&Watson, F. L. (1987). First in, first out: Word learning age and spoken word frequency as predictors of word familiarity and word naming latency. Memory&Cognition, 15, 208-216.
6. 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.
7. Connell, L.,&Lynott, D. (2010). Look but don't touch: Tactile disadvantage in processing modality-specific words. Cognition, 115, 1-9.
8. Connell, L.,&Lynott, D. (2011). Modality switching costs emerge in concept creation as well as retrieval. Cognitive Science, 35, 763-778.
9. Connell, L.,&Lynott, D. (2012a). Strength of perceptual experience predicts word processing performance better than concreteness or imageability. Cognition, 125, 452-465.
10. Connell, L.,&Lynott, D. (2012b). When does perception facilitate or interfere with conceptual processing? The effect of attentional modulation. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1-4.
11. Connell, L.,&Lynott, D. (2013). Flexible shortcuts: Linguistic distributional information affects both shallow and deep conceptual processing. Psychonomic Bulletin&Review, 20, 542-550.
12. Connell, L., Lynott, D.,&Dreyer, F. (2012). A functional role for modality-specific perceptual systems in conceptual representations. PLoS ONE 7, e33321.
13. Connell, L.&Lynott, D. (in press). Principles of representation: Why you can't represent the same concept twice. Topics in Cognitive Sciences.
14. Cortese, M. J.,&Balota, D. A. (2012). Visual word recognition in skilled adult readers. In M. J. Spivey, K. McRae,&M. F. Joanisse (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 159-185). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
15. Cortese, M. J.,&Khanna, M. M. (2008). Age of acquisition ratings for 3,000 monosyllabic words. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 791-794.
16. Cortese, M. J.,&Schock, J. (2013). Imageability and age of acquisition effects in disyllabic word recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 946-972.
17. Dilkina, K., McClelland, J. L.,&Plaut, D. C. (2008). A single-system account of semantic and lexical deficits in five semantic dementia patients. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 25, 136-164.
18. Foxe, J. J., Simpson, G. V., Ahlfors, S. P.,&Saron, C. D. (2005). Biasing the brain's attentional set: I. Cue driven deployments of intersensory selective attention. Experimental Brain Research, 166, 370-392.
19. Glantz, S. A.,&Slinker, B. Y. (2001). Applied regression and analysis of variance. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
20. Graves, W. W., Binder, J. R., Seidenberg, M. S.,&Desai, R. H. (2012). Neural correlates of semantic processing in reading aloud. In M. Faust. (Ed.), Handbook of the neuropsychology of language (pp. 165-183). Oxford, England: Wiley-Blackwell.
21. Kiefer, M., Sim, E. J., Herrnberger, B., Grothe, J.,&Hoenig, K. (2008). The sound of concepts: Four markers for a link between auditory and conceptual brain systems. Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 12224-12230.
22. Kuperman, V., Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H.,&Brysbaert, M. (2012). Age-ofacquisition ratings for 30,000 English words. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 978-990.
23. Langner, R., Kellermann, T., Boers, F., Sturm, W., Willmes, K.,&Eickhoff, S. B. (2011). Modality-specific perceptual expectations selectively modulate baseline activity in auditory, somatosensory, and visual cortices. Cerebral Cortex, 21, 2850-2862.
24. Louwerse, M. M.,&Connell, L. (2011). A taste of words: Linguistic context and perceptual simulation predict the modality of words. Cognitive Science, 35, 381-398.
25. Lynott, D.,&Connell, L. (2009). Modality exclusivity norms for 423 object properties. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 558-564.
26. Lynott, D.,&Connell, L. (2010). Embodied conceptual combination. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 1-14.
27. Lynott, D.,&Connell, L. (2013). Modality exclusivity norms for 400 nouns: The relationship between perceptual experience and surface word form. Behavior Research Methods, 45, 516-526.
28. Meteyard, L., Rodriguez Cuadrado, S., Bahrami, B.,&Vigliocco, G. (2012). Coming of age: A review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics. Cortex, 48, 788-804.
29. 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.
30. Simmons, W. K., Ramjee, V., Beauchamp, M. S., McRae, K., Martin, A., & Barsalou, L. W. (2007). A common neural substrate for perceiving and knowing about color. Neuropsychologia, 45, 2802-2810.
31. Solomon, K. O.,&Barsalou, L. W. (2004). Perceptual simulation in property verification. Memory&Cognition, 32, 244-259.
32. Spence, C., Nicholls, M. E. R.,&Driver, J. (2001). The cost of expecting events in the wrong sensory modality. Perception&Psychophysics, 63, 330-336.
33. Töllner, T., Gramann, K., Müller, H. J.,&Eimer, M. (2009). The anterior N1 component as an index of modality shifting. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21, 1653-1669.
34. van Dantzig, S., Cowell, R. A., Zeelenberg, R.,&Pecher, D. (2011). A sharp image or a sharp knife: Norms for the modality-exclusivity of 774 concept-property items. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 145-154.
35. van Dantzig, S., Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R.,&Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Perceptual processing affects conceptual processing. Cognitive Science, 32, 579-590.
36. Yap, M. J., Pexman, P. M., Wellsby, M., Hargreaves, I. S.,&Huff, M. J. (2012). An abundance of riches: Cross-task comparisons of semantic richness effects in visual word recognition. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 1-10.
37. Zevin, J. D.,&Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Age-of-acquisition effects in reading aloud: Tests of cumulative frequency and frequency trajectory. Memory&Cognition, 32, 31-38.