Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp 676–682 | Cite as

Locus of semantic priming effects in speeded naming

  • Alan H. KawamotoEmail author
  • Kathryn Goeltz
  • Jennifer T. Agbayani
  • Kristy Groel
Brief Reports


The locus of semantic priming effects was examined by measuring onset and rime durations as well as response latencies of words with consistent and inconsistent pronunciations, using the postvocalic naming task. We found that the effect of a semantic prime on naming duration was localized rather than spread across the entire word; onset durations were shorter in the related condition than in the unrelated condition, but rime durations were equal in the two prime conditions. Moreover, the priming effect on onset durations was larger for words with inconsistent than for those with consistent pronunciations. These duration results cannot be accounted for by previous proposals, but they can be accounted for by models in which phonemes are activated in parallel rather than serially from left to right and in which motor programs are based on phonemes rather than syllables. Contrary to previous reports of an interaction of prime and regularity (a factor closely related to consistency) on naming latency, we found no interaction of prime and consistency on response latency. We argue that this conflict is only apparent and arises because naming latency conflates response latency and initial phoneme duration for some targets.


Target Word Response Latency Motor Program Naming Latency Unrelated Condition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Balota, D. A., Boland, J. E., &Shields, L. W. (1989). Priming in pronunciation: Beyond pattern recognition and onset latency.Journal of Memory & Language,28, 14–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker, C. A. (1979). Semantic context and word frequency effects in visual word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,5, 252–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Coltheart, M., Curtis, B., Atkins, P., &Haller, M. (1993). Models of reading aloud: Dual-route and parallel-distributed-processing approaches.Psychological Review,100, 589–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cortese, M. J., Simpson, G. B., &Woolsey, S. (1997). Effects of association and imageability on phonological mapping.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,4, 226–231.Google Scholar
  5. Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production.Psychological Review,93, 283–321.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Dell, G. S. (1988). The retrieval of phonological forms in production: Tests of predictions from a connectionist model.Journal of Memory & Language,27, 124–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fowler, C. A., &Housum, J. (1987). Talkers’ signaling of “new” and “old” words in speech and listeners’ perception and use of the distinction.Journal of Memory & Language,26, 489–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.),Syntax & semantics: Vol. 3. Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hess, D. J., &Foss, D. J. (1994, November).The influence of context on the regularity effect. Paper presented at the 35th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, St. Louis.Google Scholar
  10. Kawamoto, A. H., Kello, C. T., Jones, R. M., &Bame, K. A. (1998). Initial phoneme versus whole word criterion to initiate pronunciation: Evidence based on response latency and initial phoneme duration.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,24, 862–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kello, C. T., &Kawamoto, A. H. (1998). Runword: An IBM-PC software package for the collection and acoustic analysis of speeded naming responses.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,30, 371–383.Google Scholar
  12. Kučera, H., &Francis, W. (1967).Computational analysis of presentday American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Lieberman, P. (1963). Some effects of semantic and grammatical context on the production and perception of speech.Language & Speech,6, 172–187.Google Scholar
  14. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Seidenberg, M. S., &McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming.Psychological Review,96, 523–568.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Shields, L. W., &Balota, D. A. (1991). Repetition and associative context effects in speech production.Language & Speech,34, 47–55.Google Scholar
  17. Taraban, R., &McClelland, J. L. (1987). Conspiracy effects in word pronunciation.Journal of Memory & Language,26, 608–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alan H. Kawamoto
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kathryn Goeltz
    • 1
  • Jennifer T. Agbayani
    • 1
  • Kristy Groel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of CaliforniaSanta Cruz

Personalised recommendations