When word identification gets tough, retrospective semantic processing comes to the rescue
Highlights
► We test forward or backward asymmetric or symmetric associative priming. ► We use masked or clear targets in lexical decision and pronunciation tasks. ► Priming is greater for masked targets, except for forward asymmetric priming. ► Priming for masked targets enhanced more for longer reaction times. ► Enhanced priming for masked targets due to strategic, retrospective mechanisms.
Introduction
An issue receiving considerable recent attention in cognitive psychology is the distinction between prospective and retrospective processing mechanisms. This distinction has been made in long-term memory paradigms and has been of special interest in the cognitive aging literature (see McDaniel & Einstein, 2007, 2008) and in the realm of working memory and attentional control (e.g., see Braver, Gray, & Burgess, 2007). The distinction can be understood in the context of a short-term memory task in which people are given a few (e.g., 4) items, one at a time, as a memory set and after a brief delay are given a probe item to which they respond whether or not it was in the memory set (Sternberg, 1966). There are two processing modes a person could use in this task. In the prospective processing mode, the person could store along with each memory set item the instruction “press the ‘yes’ key if this item appears as the probe” and then when the probe appears execute that instruction or press the ‘no’ key. In the retrospective processing mode, the person would store only the memory items and when the probe appears use it to search the memory set items to determine if there is a match and then retrieve the response instructions and execute the correct response.
For nearly 40 years, a retrospective account of performance in the Sternberg (1966) short-term memory paradigm was universally accepted and the prospective account was given virtually no consideration. However, to test whether subjects will under certain conditions adopt a prospective processing mode in the Sternberg paradigm, Speer, Jacoby, and Braver (2003) cleverly manipulated the average size of the memory set in different blocks of trials. Specifically, they embedded critical 6-item memory sets, from which they reported the data, in a block of mostly small memory sets or mostly large memory sets. (Because memory sets were presented one item at a time, memory-set size could not be known until the probe appeared.) In the block of mostly smaller memory sets, subjects could effectively use the prospective processing mode during encoding and presumably would apply it to all trials in that block. However, in the block containing mostly larger memory sets, it presumably would be too burdensome to store and retain the response instruction with so many memory-set items. Thus, subjects would utilize a retrospective processing mode.
The results were that reaction times (RTs) to probes from the critical 6-item memory sets were faster and more accurate in the small-memory-set block (prospective processing). The authors argued that the generation of the response code for each memory set item during encoding in the prospective processing mode allowed for a rapid target-detection process when the probe appeared, whereas when subjects were in the retrospective processing mode, they had to adopt a slower retrospective retrieval process that could not be initiated until after the probe appeared. More compellingly, the putative prospective and retrospective processing modes produced a double dissociation in fMRI-measured brain activity. In the putative prospective processing block, activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex steadily increased during memory set encoding and through the probe delay whereas in the putative retrospective processing block it increased only during the encoding of the first few items in the memory set and then showed a small decrease until the probe appeared. In contrast, during probe processing, activity in the anterior prefrontal cortex (which has been linked to retrospective episodic retrieval processes, e.g., Lepage, Ghaffar, Nyberg, & Tulving, 2000) decreased and markedly increased, respectively, in the putative prospective and retrospective processing blocks.
Single and double dissociations such as those reported by Speer et al. (2003) do not provide compelling direct evidence that the qualitatively distinct processes are indeed prospective vs. retrospective because there typically is no direct manipulation of a variable that is necessarily tied to prospective vs. retrospective processing (for an exception using pigeons, see Roitblat, 1980). To remedy this, in the present experiment we manipulate such a variable in the semantic priming paradigm, which in contrast to performance in the Sternberg paradigm, was for many years assumed to be mediated by only prospective processing mechanisms (with a couple of early exceptions being Forster, 1979, Forster, 1981 and Stanovich and West (1983)).
Semantic priming is the observation that in the lexical (word/nonword) decision task (LDT) and pronunciation task, people respond to a target word (e.g., west) more quickly and accurately when it is immediately preceded by a semantically or associatively related prime (east) rather than an unrelated prime (table). (See McNamara, 2005, Neely, 1991 for extensive reviews.) To constrain theories of semantic priming, researchers have investigated how the effects of other variables influence (interact with) priming. Two such variables are the target’s frequency of occurrence in print (word frequency) and the visual quality of the target (target degradation). Results have consistently shown that priming is greater for low-frequency than high-frequency targets in both the LDT (e.g., Becker, 1979, Stone and Van Orden, 1992, Tse and Neely, 2007, Yap et al., 2009) and pronunciation (e.g., Stanovich & West, 1979) and for visually degraded targets than for clear targets in both the LDT (e.g., Balota et al., 2008, Becker and Killion, 1977, Meyer et al., 1975) and pronunciation (e.g., Balota et al., 2008, Besner and Smith, 1992). Specifically, the impaired performance observed for low-frequency targets relative to high-frequency targets and for visually degraded targets relative to clear targets is greater following unrelated primes than following related primes. These interactions are called overadditive because the detrimental effects of lower word frequency and of target degradation are amplified by the adverse effect of the target being presented in an unrelated priming context rather than in a related priming context. Viewed through the lens of priming effects, this means that related primes mitigate the detrimental effects that lower word frequency and target degradation have on word recognition.
The present research focuses on the overadditive Priming × Target Degradation interaction (hereafter P × TDI), which occurs for both the LDT and pronunciation, but only when the relatedness proportion (the proportion of word-prime/word-target pairs that are related) is high (i.e., ⩾.5) and the prime–target associative strength is high (Besner and Smith, 1992, Borowsky and Besner, 1993, Robidoux et al., 2010, Stolz and Neely, 1995). When the relatedness proportion is low or the prime–target associative strength is low, priming is of the same magnitude for clear and degraded targets (Stolz & Neely, 1995). It is noteworthy that when the forward prime-to-target associative strength is high, the backward target-to-prime associative strength is also typically high (e.g., cat–dog, east–west), which means there are strong symmetrical (SYM) associations between the prime and target. Because priming also occurs in the LDT when there is a backward asymmetric (BA) association between the prime and target (prime: small, target: shrink) (Koriat, 1981; see Kahan, Neely, and Forsythe (1999) for a summary of backward priming effects), an interesting issue, which the present research addresses, is whether the overadditive P × TDI obtained with symmetrically related primes and targets is being mediated by forward associations, backward associations or both.
This issue is of general theoretical interest because it has the potential to provide evidence for the distinction between prospective vs. retrospective processing mechanisms (Neely & Keefe, 1989) that is more direct than the prior indirect evidence for that distinction. Prospective theories of priming all assume that a prime’s facilitatory effect on related target processing is mediated by a mechanism that is initiated before the target is presented and gives the related target a processing “head start” relative to an unrelated target (Balota et al., 2008, Posner and Snyder, 1975). In activational prospective accounts, facilitation is produced either by the prime’s automatically preactivating the related target’s representation via spreading activation (e.g., Neely, 1977, Posner and Snyder, 1975) or by automatically preactivating the semantic features it shares with the prime in a parallel distributed memory network (e.g., Masson, 1995, Plaut and Booth, 2000). This preactivation occurs within less than 250 ms of the prime’s onset (e.g., Hutchison et al., 2001, Neely, 1977). Activation-based prospective priming theories can account for the P × TDI by postulating that preactivation of the target’s representation or semantic features either (a) speeds the rate at which the target’s visual letter features are extracted and to a greater degree when the target is visually degraded or (b) reduces the threshold for the amount of visual information required to identify the target. Because visual information is extracted more slowly for degraded than clear targets, the selective lowering of the threshold for related targets will result in degradation slowing recognition less for related than unrelated targets, with the result being a larger priming effect for degraded than clear targets.
One currently accepted prospective account of the P × TDI includes several subsystems, two of which are the orthographic input lexicon and the semantic system (Besner and Smith, 1992, Borowsky and Besner, 1993, Stolz and Neely, 1995). When the subject encounters a visually presented word, activation begins in the orthographic input lexicon and then proceeds to the semantic system. Activation in the semantic system produces activation of the prime’s associates which then feeds back into the orthographic input lexicon, thereby lowering the threshold required for identification of targets associatively related to the prime. Presumably, this feedback of activation from the semantic system to the orthographic input lexicon is under strategic control, which explains why the P × TDI occurs only with a high relatedness proportion.
In expectancy-based prospective priming theories, the prime’s presentation leads to the generation of an expectancy set containing items related to the prime (Becker, 1980, Becker and Killion, 1977). The generation of this expectancy set (a) requires attentional resources, (b) is under strategic control and more likely to occur the higher is the relatedness proportion and (c) requires 300 ms or more to complete (Hutchison et al., 2001, Neely, 1977). Becker and Killion’s (1977) expectancy-based prospective priming theory accounts for the P × TDI by assuming that related targets that are in the expectancy set can be identified with a more cursory analysis of their letter features than can words unrelated to the prime. Thus, as in the activation-based accounts, target degradation slows recognition less for related targets than for unrelated targets.
Unlike prospective priming theories, retrospective accounts assume that RTs are faster for related than unrelated targets because of processes that are initiated after the target is presented (e.g., Balota et al., 2008, Bodner and Masson, 1997, Bodner and Masson, 2001, Forster, 1979, Forster, 1981, Neely and Keefe, 1989, Neely et al., 1989, Ratcliff and McKoon, 1988). All of these retrospective accounts assume that the target’s presentation leads to the prime’s representation being retrieved and its semantic properties being matched to or combined with the target’s semantic properties. The most compelling evidence for a retrospective priming mechanism is the aforementioned BA priming effect (Kahan et al., 1999), in which RTs are faster for related than unrelated prime–target pairs when there is a BA association between the prime and its related target (prime: small, target: shrink). Clearly, prospective theories of priming cannot account for backward priming. For now, the details of exactly how and when retrospective prime retrieval leads to faster RTs for BA related prime–target pairs relative to unrelated pairs need not concern us. What is important is how these retrospective accounts could in general accommodate the P × TDI.
Most retrospective accounts of prime retrieval are based on intentional strategies that require attentional resources. (The one exception is Ratcliff and McKoon’s (1988), compound-cue theory, but the role of strategies need not concern us at this point.) When a target is degraded the extraction of its letter features is slowed. This could set into motion a consciously controlled compensatory mechanism that accesses contextual information provided by the prime that could aid in deciphering the degraded target (Balota et al., 2008, Stanovich and West, 1983). Although this mechanism presumably operates even when the target is not degraded (because BA priming occurs for clear targets in the LDT), as targets become increasingly degraded the subject’s reliance on retrieving information from the prime increases. Because of this, the contextual facilitation produced by the retrieval of a related prime will be greater when the target is degraded, such that the detrimental effects of target degradation will be diminished even more by a related prime, which is what is observed in the overadditive P × TDI.
Based on analyses of the full RT distribution, Balota et al. (2008) suggested that the P × TDI that occurs in the LDT and in pronunciation may indeed be mediated by retrospective priming mechanisms. The impetus for RT distributional analyses stems from the fact that RT distributions are often positively skewed. This creates a situation in which a focus on only differences between overall means can potentially be misleading. For example, prospective priming mechanisms such as spreading activation or expectancy could shift the overall RT distribution downward by a constant amount throughout the entire RT distribution. However, at the same time, retrospective priming mechanisms could also affect the skew of the distribution by exerting a greater effect in the tail containing the longest RTs. To assess this possibility, Balota et al. (2008) examined the effects of priming and target degradation throughout the full RT distribution with a prime–target stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) of 800 ms. They found that the P × TDI was present for the fastest RT bin but increased in magnitude for the slowest RT bins for both the LDT and pronunciation. Balota et al. interpreted the finding that the P × TDI was significant even for the bin containing the shortest RTs as indicating that this interaction is being mediated by prospective priming mechanisms that begin to operate before the target appears. Balota et al. further argued that the increase in the magnitude of the P × TDI as RTs increased was due to the longer RTs having provided enough time for a slower acting retrospective priming process initiated after the target’s appearance to become operative, such that the related prime could further alleviate the detrimental effects of target degradation through retrospective priming mechanisms. As will now be discussed, by manipulating a variable (i.e., the direction of the prime–target association) that is directly linked to whether prospective or retrospective priming mechanisms can produce priming, the present experiment has the potential to allow us to isolate more clearly the contributions that prospective and retrospective mechanisms make to the P × TDI.
Section snippets
The present experiment
In the present experiment we sought to answer a previously unanswered simple empirical question. Will the robust overadditive P × TDI obtained in the LDT and in pronunciation when there are strong SYM associations between the prime and target (e.g., east west) also be obtained when there is only a strong forward asymmetric (FA) association from the prime to the target (e.g., keg beer) or only a strong BA association from the target to the prime (e.g., small shrink). This question remains
Results
Only data from correct responses were included in the RT analyses. For the LDT, data were discarded from 12 subjects whose overall accuracy was less than 90%. Statistical analyses were performed on the data from the remaining 168 subjects, with 42 subjects having been tested on each of the four counterbalancing lists. Pronunciation data for all subjects were analyzed, as accuracy exceeded 91% for all subjects. Because we wanted to retain as many RTs (especially long ones) as possible for the
General discussion
Our experiment has yielded six empirical contributions, five of which are entirely novel, that we believe have important theoretical implications. They are as follows:
(1) For both degraded and clear targets, in both the LDT and pronunciation SYM priming was equivalent to the sum of the priming effects produced by FA and BA pairs that had forward and backward associative strengths matched with those present in the SYM pairs. This new finding extends Balota and Paul’s (1996) finding from two
Conclusion
Contrary to most theoretical accounts of the P × TDI, which are based on prospective priming mechanisms (e.g., Becker and Killion, 1977, Besner and Smith, 1992, Borowsky and Besner, 1993, Plaut and Booth, 2000, Robidoux et al., 2010, Stolz and Neely, 1995), the present data clearly demonstrate that the nearly ubiquitous overadditive P × TDI previously reported for SYM pairs in the LDT and in pronunciation is mediated by a backward (target-to-prime) association and is not produced nor enhanced by a
Acknowledgments
This research was presented at the 49th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society in November, 2008. We thank Thomas Dansereau, Sarah Deane, and Saskia Smeele for their assistance with data collection and David Balota, Derek Besner, Kit Cho, Keith Hutchison and Sachiko Kinoshita for their very helpful comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript.
References (61)
- et al.
Beyond mean response latency: Response time distributional analyses of semantic priming
Journal of Memory and Language
(2008) - et al.
Masked repetition priming of words and nonwords: Evidence for a nonlexical basis for priming
Journal of Memory and Language
(1997) - et al.
Prime validity affects masked repetition priming: Evidence for an episodic resource account of priming
Journal of Memory and Language
(2001) The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior
(1973)- et al.
Semantic context effects on visual word processing: A hybrid prospective/retrospective processing theory
- et al.
Interaction of prime representation with visual degradation: Is priming a retrieval phenomenon?
Journal of Memory and Language
(1990) - et al.
Individual differences in the joint effects of semantic priming and word frequency revealed by RT distributional analyses: The role of lexical integrity
Journal of Memory and Language
(2009) - et al.
Episodic retrieval and feature facilitation in intertrial priming of visual search
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
(2011) - et al.
Are lexical decisions a good measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.
(1984) - et al.
Depth of automatic spreading activation: Mediated priming effects in pronunciation but not in lexical decision
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
(1986)
Summation of activation: Evidence from multiple primes that converge and diverge within semantic memory
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
The English Lexicon project
Behavior Research Methods
Semantic context and word frequency effects in visual word recognition
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
Semantic context effects in visual word recognition: An analysis of semantic strategies
Memory & Cognition
Interaction of visual and cognitive effects in word recognition
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
Models of visual word recognition: When obscuring the stimulus yields a clearer view
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition
Beyond binary judgments: Prime validity modulates masked repetition priming in the naming task
Memory & Cognition
Visual word recognition: A multistage activation model
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
When do nonwords activate semantics? Implications for models of visual word recognition
Memory & Cognition
Explaining the many varieties of working memory variation: Dual mechanisms of cognitive control
Dissociative effects of stimulus quality on semantic and morphological contexts in visual word recognition
Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
Meta-analysis of experiments with matched groups or repeated measures designs
Psychological Methods
Individual differences in information-processing rate and amount: Implications for group differences in response latency
Psychological Bulletin
Levels of processing and the structure of the language processor
Priming and the effects of sentence and lexical constraints on naming time: Evidence for autonomous lexical processing
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
On methods in the analysis of profile data
Psychometrika
Predicting priming at the item level
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
With great expectations, can two “wrongs” prime a “right”
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
Cited by (35)
Priming by relational integration in perceptual identification and Stroop colour naming
2014, Journal of Memory and LanguageCitation Excerpt :As described above, there are currently several hypothesised mechanisms of lexical priming. To be clear, these various mechanisms are not necessarily mutually exclusive; lexical priming may result from multiple processes (e.g., Jones, 2012; Neely & Keefe, 1989; Neely et al., 1989; Thomas, Neely, & O’Connor, 2012). Indeed, the aim of the present research is not to test these extant mechanisms of priming, but rather to investigate a new mechanism that can explain integrative priming.
The elusive impact of L2 immersion on translation priming
2023, Studies in Second Language AcquisitionInteractions of stimulus quality and semantic context on N400 in visual word recognition
2022, Applied PsycholinguisticsOn the Joint Effects of Stimulus Quality and Word Frequency in Lexical Decision: Conditions That Promote Staged Versus Cascaded Processing
2022, Canadian Journal of Experimental PsychologyVisual Word Recognition: Attention, Intention, Context, and Processing Dynamics
2022, Canadian Journal of Experimental PsychologyEngineering psychology and human performance
2021, Engineering Psychology and Human Performance