Is There an Orthographic Boost for Ambiguous Words During Their Processing?

被引:5
作者
Haro, Juan [1 ]
Comesana, Montserrat [2 ]
Ferre, Pilar [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Rovira & Virgili, Res Ctr Behav Assessment CRAMC, Dept Psychol, Crta Valls S-N,Campus Sescelades, E-43007 Tarragona, Spain
[2] Univ Minho, Sch Psychol, Human Cognit Lab, CIPsi, Braga, Portugal
关键词
Semantic ambiguity; Ambiguity advantage; Word recognition; Orthographic processing; Two-alternative forced-choice task; SEMANTIC AMBIGUITY; LEXICAL-DECISION; MULTIPLE MEANINGS; COUNTER MODEL; TASKS; PERCEPTION; FREQUENCY; POLYSEMY; SEARCH; BIAS;
D O I
10.1007/s10936-018-9616-1
中图分类号
H0 [语言学];
学科分类号
030303 ; 0501 ; 050102 ;
摘要
The present study explores the issue of why ambiguous words are recognized faster than unambiguous ones during word recognition. To this end we contrasted two different hypotheses: the semantic feedback hypothesis (Hino and Lupker in J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 22:1331-1356, 1996. 10.1037/0096-1523.22.6.1331), and the hypothesis proposed by Borowsky and Masson (J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cognit 22:63-85, 1996. 10.1037/0278-7393.22.1.63). Although both hypotheses agree that ambiguous words benefit during recognition in that they engage more semantic activation, they disagree as to whether or not this greater semantic activation feeds back to the orthographic level, hence speeding up the orthographic coding of ambiguous words. Participants were presented with ambiguous and unambiguous words in two tasks, a lexical decision task (LDT) and a two-alternative forced-choice task (2AFC). We found differences between ambiguous and unambiguous words in both the LDT and the 2AFC tasks. These results suggest that the orthographic coding of ambiguous words is boosted during word processing. This finding lends support to the semantic feedback hypothesis.
引用
收藏
页码:519 / 534
页数:16
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
BALOTA DA, 1991, PSYCHOLOGY OF WORD MEANINGS, P187
[2]   Early semantic activation in a semantic categorization task with masked primes: Cascaded or not? [J].
Bell, Dane ;
Forster, Kenneth ;
Drake, Shiloh .
JOURNAL OF MEMORY AND LANGUAGE, 2015, 85 :1-14
[3]   Semantic ambiguity effects in word identification [J].
Borowsky, R ;
Masson, MEJ .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 1996, 22 (01) :63-85
[4]   Priming is not all bias: Commentary on Ratcliff and McKoon (1997) [J].
Bowers, JS .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1999, 106 (03) :582-596
[5]  
Comesana M, 2017, SPEECH LANGUAGE HEAR
[6]   Neighborhood-frequency effects when primes and targets are of different lengths [J].
De Moor, W ;
Brysbaert, M .
PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH-PSYCHOLOGISCHE FORSCHUNG, 2000, 63 (02) :159-162
[7]   EsPal: One-stop shopping for Spanish word properties [J].
Duchon, Andrew ;
Perea, Manuel ;
Sebastian-Galles, Nuria ;
Marti, Antonia ;
Carreiras, Manuel .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2013, 45 (04) :1246-1258
[8]   A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy [J].
Forster, KI ;
Forster, JC .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS INSTRUMENTS & COMPUTERS, 2003, 35 (01) :116-124
[9]   TERMINATING AND EXHAUSTIVE SEARCH IN LEXICAL ACCESS [J].
FORSTER, KI ;
BEDNALL, ES .
MEMORY & COGNITION, 1976, 4 (NA1) :53-61
[10]   I saw this somewhere else: The Spanish Ambiguous Words (SAW) database [J].
Fraga, Isabel ;
Padron, Isabel ;
Perea, Manuel ;
Comesana, Montserrat .
LINGUA, 2017, 185 :1-10