Presentation on theme: "Facilitation in Recognizing Pairs of Words: Evidence of a Dependence between Retrieval Operations By David E. Meyer & Roger W. Schvaneveldt Presented by."— Presentation transcript:
Facilitation in Recognizing Pairs of Words: Evidence of a Dependence between Retrieval Operations By David E. Meyer & Roger W. Schvaneveldt Presented by Zhang Qunxing
Outline: Research Question and hypotheses Literature Review Experiments (2) Discussion Serial-decision model Location-shifting model
Research Question The present study investigates into the effect of meaning on recognition of pairs of words in lexical decision task. Hypotheses: Retrieval operations are separate, successive decisions. The time taken depends on the associative relation between the two words.
Literature Review: semantic factors influencing lexical access 1. Rubenstein et al. (1970)—frequency effect and homograph effect lexical decision task Results: High frequency words < low frequency words Homographs < nonhomographs Suggested explanation: Word frequency affects the order of examining stored words in long-term memory. More replicas of homographs are stored in long-term memory. 2. Meyer & Ellis (1970) – semantic category effect semantic decision task Results: Smaller category < lexical decision < larger category Suggested explanation: Semantic decision involves searching through stored words in the semantic category.
Experiments Task: lexical decision task with two strings of letters on display yes-no task: yes if both strings are words same-difference task: same if both strings are either words or nonwords Procedure: Ready signal (1 sec.) → stimuli display → subject response → interval (2 sec.) Note: Correct and quick response is encouraged by enforcing penalty on errors and mean RTs longer than 1 sec.
Stimuli and Required Response
Result Exp. 1: Implication: Degree of association affects lexical decision in the yes-no task.
Exp. 2: Exp. 1 VS Exp. 2:
Discussion serial-decision model for pair word recognition: separate, successive decisions on the two strings of letters General description:
Explanatory power of the serial-decision model: 1. In yes-no task, Nw-W < W-Nw, Nw-Nw = Nw-W because only first decision is sufficient when the top string is a nonword. 2. In yes-no task, high error rate for W-Nw pair because of premature termination of processing after the first decision 3. same-different task RT > yes-no task RT because same-different task demands comparison of the two decisions.
The time taken to make a lexical decision: 1. to decide that a string is a word: 183 ± 14 msec. In yes-no task, T (W-Nw) = T (W) + T (Nw) = 1087 msec. T (Nw-W) = T (Nw) = 904 msec. So T (W) = T (W-Nw) – T (Nw-W) = 183 msec. 2. to make a comparison for “same” decision: 216 ± 68 msec. for “different” decision: W-Nw RT (same-different task – yes-no task) = 1318–1087 = 231 ± 76 msec.
Operation underlying the decisions: location-shifting model Words have locations reserved in long-term memory. → Association effect implies the closer distance between the locations of two associated words. → Retrieval operation R2 depends on the previous operation R1 – shifting from Location 1 to Location 2. Explanatory power of location-shifting model: 1. In same-different task, W-Nw < Nw-W. ∵ Location is preselected to familiar sector (word sector). ∴ W-Nw involves one major shift: familiar → unfamiliar Nw-W involves two major shifts: familiar → unfamiliar → familiar
2. Schaeffer & Wallace’s studies (1969, 1970) – semantic category decision Results: Semantic similarity facilitated “same” response and inhibited “different” response. Original suggested explanation: comparing meanings of the words Revision of the explanation There are two components in the judgment process: retrieval process (location-shifting) + meaning comparison.
General Conclusion: No matter what process underlies lexical access, whether it is spread excitation, location shifting, comparison of meanings, or other, there exists association effect in word recognition, which is independent of task type.