Abstract
When subjects are required to monitor verbal displays for predesignated targets, their reaction time for word targets is less than that for subcomponents of words, such as letters. One explanation for this word-priority effect is that encoding of words is completed prior to encoding of their constituent letters. An alternative explanation is that it takes longer to compare letter targets with encoded displays than it does word targets. In this experiment, target set size and display illumination were independently manipulated during word and letter target-detection tasks, and interactions between factors were examined using the assumptions of Sternberg’s (1969) additive factor approach. It was found that the magnitude of the word-priority effect increased with an increase in target set size, but not with a decrease in display illumination. This suggested that the effect occurs at a comparison stage rather than at an encoding stage in the information processing chain.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Ball, F., Wood, C., &Smith, E. E. When are semantic targets detected faster than visual or acoustic ones?Perception & Psychophysics, 1975,7, 1–8.
Clark, H. H. The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1973,12, 335–359.
Foss, D. J., &Swinney, D. A. On the psychological reality of the phoneme.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1973,12, 246–257.
Johnson, N. F. On the function of letters in word identification: Some data and a preliminary model.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1975,14, 17–29.
Juola, J. F., &Atkinson, R. C. Memory scanning for words versus categories.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1971,10, 522–527.
Juola, J. F., Fischler, I., Wood, C. T., &Atkinson, R. C. Recognition time for information in long-term memory.Perception & Psychophysics, 1971,10, 8–14.
Massaro, D. W.Experimental psychology and information processing. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1975.
McNeil, D., &Lindig, K, The perceptual reality of phonemes, syllables, words, and sentences.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1973,12, 419–430.
Pachella, R. G. The interpretation of reaction time in information-processing research. In B. H, Kantowitz (Ed.),Human information processing: Tutorial in performance and cognition. Potomac, Md: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1974.
Reicher, G. M. Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfidness of stimulus material.Journal of Expedmental Psychology, 1969,21, 275–280.
Savin, H. B., &Bever, T. G. The nonperceptual reality of the phoneme.Journal of Verbal Leaning and Verbal Behavior, 1970,9, 295–302.
Sloboda, J. A. Decision times for word and letter search: A holistic word identification model examined.Journal qf Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1976,15, 93–101.
Spoehr, K. T., &Smith.E. E. The role of syllables in perceptual processing.Cognitive Psychology, 1973,5, 71–89.
Sternberg, S. The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders’ method. In W. G. Koster (Ed.).Attention and perforrmance II, Amsterdam: North Holland, 1969.
Townsend, J. T., Taylor, S. G., &Brown, D. R. Lateral masking for letters with unlimited viewing time.Perception & Psychophysics, 1971,10, 375–378.
Wheeler, D. D. Processes in word recognition.Cognitive Psychology, 1970,1, 59–85.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sloboda, J.A. The locus of the word-priority effect in a target-detection task. Memory & Cognition 5, 371–376 (1977). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197585
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197585