Abstract
According to the interactive activation framework proposed by McClelland and Rumelhart (1981), activation spreads both forward and backward between some levels of representation during visual word recognition. An important boundary condition, however, is that the spread of activation fromlower to higher levels can be prevented (e.g., explicit letter processing during prime processing eliminates the well-documented semantic priming effect). Can the spread of activation fromhigher to lower levels also be prevented? This question was addressed with a choice task procedure in which subjects read a prime word and then responded to a target, performing either lexical decision or letter search depending on the color of the target. A semantic context effect was observed in lexical decision, providing evidence of semantic-level activation. In contrast, there was no semantic context effect in the letter search task, despite evidence of lexical involvement: Words were searched faster than nonwords. Further evidence of lexical involvement in the letter search task appeared in Experiment 2 in the form of greater identity priming for words than for nonwords. The results of these experiments are consistent with the conclusion that feedback from the semantic level to the lexical level can be blocked. Hence, between-level activation blocks can be instantiated in both bottom-up and top-down directions.
Article PDF
References
Allport, D. A., Styles, E. A., &Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.),Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421–452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
Balota, D., &Abrams, R. (1995). Mental chronometry: Beyond onset latencies in the lexical decision task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 1289–1302.
Bauer, B., &Besner, D. (1997). Processing in the Stroop task: Mental set as a determinant of performance.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,51, 61–68.
Becker, C. A. (1979). Semantic context effects in visual word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,5, 252–259.
Becker, C. A., &Killion, T. H. (1977). Interaction of visual and cognitive effects in word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,3, 389–401.
Besner, D., &Smith, M. C. (1992). Models of visual word recognition: When obscuring the stimulus yields a clearer view.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 468–482.
Besner, D., Smith, M. C., &MacLeod, C. M. (1990). Visual word recognition: A dissociation of lexical and semantic processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,16, 862–869.
Besner, D., &Stolz, J. A. (1999). Unconsciously controlled processing: The Stroop effect reconsidered.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,6, 449–455.
Besner, D., Stolz, J. A., &Boutilier, C. (1997). The Stroop effect and the myth of automaticity.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,4, 221–225.
Blum, T. L., &Johnson, N. F. (1993). The effect of semantic priming on the detection of letters within words.Memory & Cognition,21, 389–396.
Borowsky, R., &Besner, D. (1993). Visual word recognition: A multistage activation model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,19, 815–840.
Buchanan, L., &Besner, D. (1993). Reading aloud: Evidence for the use of a whole word nonsemantic pathway.Canadian Journal of Psychology,47, 133–152.
Chiappe, P. R., Smith, M. C., &Besner, D. (1996). Semantic priming in visual word recognition: Activation blocking and domains of processing.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,3, 249–253.
Collins, A. M., &Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing.Psychological Review,82, 407–428.
Forster, K. I. (1999). The microgenesis of priming effects in lexical access.Brain & Language,68, 5–15.
Friedrich, F. J., Henik, A., &Tzelgov, J. (1991). Automatic processes in lexical access and spreading activation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 792–806.
Henik, A., Friedrich, F. J., Tzelgov, J., &Tramer, S. (1994). Capacity demands of automatic processes in semantic priming.Memory & Cognition,22, 157–168.
Herdman, C. M., Chernecki, D., &Norris, D. (1999). Naming cAsE aLtErNaTeD words.Memory & Cognition,27, 254–266.
Johnston, J. C. (1981). Understanding word perception: Clues from studying the word superiority effect. In O. J. L. Tzeng & H. Singer (Eds.),Perception of print: Reading research in experimental psychology (pp. 65–81). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Krueger, L. E., &Weiss, M. E. (1976). Letter search through words and nonwords: The effect of fixed, absent, or mutilated targets.Memory & Cognition,4, 200–206.
Masson, M. E. J. (1991). A distributed memory model of context effects in word identification. In D. Besner & G. Humphreys (Eds.),Basic processes in reading: Visual word recognition (pp. 233–263). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Masson, M. E. J. (1999). Semantic priming in a recurrent network: Comment on Dalrymple-Alford and Marmurek (1999).Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,25, 776–794.
McClelland, J. L. (1987). The case for interactionism in language processing. In M. Coltheart (Ed.),Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 3–35). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
McClelland, J. L., &Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactiveactivation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings.Psychological Review,88, 375–407.
McRae, K., &Boisvert, S. (1998). Automatic semantic similarity priming.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,24, 558–572.
Meyer, D. E., Schvaneveldt, R. W., &Ruddy, M.G. (1975). Loci of contextual effect on visual word recognition. In P. M. A. Rabbitt & S. Dornic (Eds.),Attention and performance V (pp. 98–118). New York: Academic Press.
Morton, J. (1969). Interaction of information in word recognition.Psychological Review,76, 165–178.
Neely, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In D. Besner & G. Humphreys (Eds.),Basic processes in reading: Visual word recognition (pp. 264–336). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Neely, J. H., &Kahan, T. (2001). Is semantic activation automatic? A critical reevaluation. In H. L. Roediger III, J. S. Nairne, I. Neath, & A. M. Surprenant (Eds.),The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder (pp. 69–93). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Paap, K. R., Newsome, S. L., McDonald, J. E., &Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1982). An activation-verification model for letter and word recognition.Psychological Review,89, 573–594.
Plourde, C. E., &Besner, D. (1997). On the locus of the word fre quency effect in visual word recognition.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,51, 181–194.
Scarborough, D. L., Cortese, C., &Scarborough, H. S. (1977). Frequency and repetition effects in lexical memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,3, 1–17.
Smith, M. C., Meiran, N., &Besner, D. (2000). On the interaction between linguistic and pictorial systems in the absence of semantic mediation: Evidence from a priming task.Memory & Cognition,28, 204–213.
Smith, M. C., Theodor, L., &Franklin, P.E. (1983). The relationship between contextual facilitation and depth of processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,9, 697–712.
Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders’ methods. In W. G. Koster (Ed.),Attention and performance II (pp. 276–315). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Sternberg, S. (1998). Discovering mental processing stages: The method of additive factors. In D. Scarborough & S. Sternberg (Eds.),An invitation to cognitive science: Vol. 4. Methods, models, and conceptual issues (pp. 703–863). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Stolz, J. A., &Besner, D. (1996). Role of set in visual word recognition: Activation and activation blocking as nonautomatic processes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,22, 1166–1177.
Stolz, J. A., &Besner, D. (1998). Levels of representation in visual word recognition: A dissociation between morphological and semantic processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 1642–1655.
Stolz, J. A., &Neely, J. (1995). When target degradation does and does not enhance semantic context effects in word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 596–611.
Stolz, J. A., Robidoux, S., & Besner, D. (2001).Semantic context effects in visual word recognition: A simulation approach. Manuscript under revision.
Taft, M. (1991).Reading and the mental lexicon. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ziegler, J. C., Van Orden, G. C., &Jacobs, A.M. (1997). Phonology can help or hurt the perception of print. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,23, 845–860.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Additional information
This work was supported by research grants from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada to M.C.S. (OGPIN012) and D.B. (A0998).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Smith, M.C., Besner, D. Modulating semantic feedback in visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 8, 111–117 (2001). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196146
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196146