Can orthographic rimes facilitate naming?

Although the orthographic rime (body) is thought to play an important role in reading English, previous priming experiments found little or no evidence for facilitatory body-priming effects in the naming task. That is, hose primes NOSE no better than does a completely unrelated prime. In the present study, the hypothesis that facilitatory body-priming effects are typically masked by strong inhibitory onset effects was investigated. It was shown that when the onset of a prime was removed, facilitatory body priming could be obtained with stimuli that previously had produced no evidence of facilitation. The present study thus reconciles conflicting patterns concerning facilitation versus inhibition in body priming.     

What does rapid automatized naming measure? A new RAN task compared to naming and lexical decision

The present research investigated the relationship between Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) performance, letter-string reading measures of sight vocabulary (SV) and phonetic decoding (PD), and lexical decision. Criterion-based naming rates were obtained from three types of RAN tasks: digits, letters, and letter sounds. Latency measures were obtained from the naming of regular words, exception words, nonwords and pseudohomophones; as well as button press and verbal lexical decision tasks. Regression analyses supported the hypotheses that RAN-Letters latency reflects SV processing in that its variance is uniquely accounted for by exception word naming latency and button press lexical decision latency, and that RAN-Letter Sounds latency best reflects PD processing in that its variance is uniquely accounted for by pseudohomophone and nonword naming latency. Findings are discussed in light of what the RAN tasks are measuring, implications involving visual word recognition models of reading, and the utility of the new RAN-Letter Sounds task with respect to diagnostic and remediation applications.     

The syllable’s role in word naming

In a series of experiments, the masked priming paradigm with very brief prime exposures was used to investigate the role of the syllable in the production of English. Experiment 1 (word naming task) showed a syllable priming effect for English words with clear initial syllable boundaries (such as BALCONY), but no effect with ambisyllabic words targets (such as BALANCE, where the /l/ belongs to both the first and the second syllables). Experiment 2 failed to show such syllable priming effects in the lexical decision task. Experiment 3 demonstrated that for words with clear initial syllable boundaries, naming latencies were faster only when primes formed the first syllable of the target, in comparison with a neutral condition. Experiment 4 showed that the two possible initial syllables of ambisyllabic words facilitated word naming to the same extent, in comparison with the neutral condition. Finally, Experiment 5 demonstrated that the syllable priming effect obtained for CV words with clear initial syllable boundaries (such as DIVORCE) was not due to increased phonological and/or orthographic overlap. These results, showing that the syllable constitutes a unit of speech production in English, are discussed in relation to the model of phonological and phonetic encoding proposed by Levelt and Wheeldon (1994).     

Is there semantic interference in delayed naming?

The semantic interference effect in the picture-word interference task is interpreted as an index of lexical competition in prominent speech production models. Janssen, Schirm, Mahon, and Caramazza (2008) challenged this interpretation on the basis of experiments with a novel version of this task, which introduced a task-switching component. Participants either named the picture or read the word, depending on the word's color. Janssen et al. reported semantic interference in picture naming, regardless of whether the word appeared simultaneously with the picture (immediate naming) or 1,000 ms after the picture (delayed naming). Because picture name retrieval is completed in less than 1,000 ms, the finding in delayed naming was taken as evidence against the lexical competition account. In 3 sets of experiments conducted in German and English, we tested for semantic effects in Janssen et al.'s task-switching version and in the standard picture-word interference task. Using identical materials, we obtained sizeable interference effects in the standard task (Experiments 2, 4, and 6) but no effects in the task-switching version (Experiments 1, 3, and 5). When the word reading trials of the task-switching version were replaced with no-go trials (Experiment 7), semantic interference reemerged in immediate naming but was still absent in delayed naming. The experiments question the reliability of Janssen et al.'s critical finding and suggest that theoretical inferences about the origin of semantic effects in the standard picture-word interference task based on results from the task-switching version used by Janssen et al. are difficult to draw.     

Is action naming better preserved (than object naming) in Alzheimer's disease and why should we ask?

The present study compared object and action naming in patients with Alzheimer's dementia. We tested the hypothesis put forward in (some) previous studies that in Alzheimer's dementia the production of verbs, that is required in action naming, is better preserved than the production of nouns, that is required in object naming. The possible reason for the dissociation is that verbs are supported predominantly by frontal brain structures that may remain relatively better preserved in early Alzheimer's disease. Objects, on the other hand, are supported by temporal lobe structures that are affected early in the disease. An alternative hypothesis, which is supported by other studies, is that action naming is more impaired than object naming due to verbs being semantically more complex than nouns. In order to test these contrasting hypotheses, the present study used more stringent methodology than previous studies. We used a larger set of stimuli with carefully matched object and action items and we collected not only accuracy data but also naming latencies, a measure that is sensitive to even mild lexical retrieval problems. We compared the performance of 19 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease with that of 19 healthy age matched participants. We found that both the patients and the comparison group responded faster and made fewer errors on the object pictures than the action pictures. A qualitative analysis of the naming errors indicated that object and action naming pose different demands for the language system. The results overall suggest that the patients' performance is an exaggeration of the pattern present in the comparison participants.     

What does naming a picture do? Effects of prior picture naming on recognition of identical and same-name alternatives

Three experiments investigated the effects of naming pictures of objects during study on the subsequent recognition of physically identical, name-match, and new objects. Prior naming improved correct classification of all three item types at recognition. For line drawings and for photographs of functionally distinct objects, prior naming reduced the tendency to confuse identical and same-name alternatives. In Experiment 2, prior naming eliminated the right visual field/left hemisphere advantage for speeded recognition of name-match pictures, suggesting that prior naming reduces the likelihood that pictures are named at recognition. The implications of these results for dual-encoding (Paivio, 1971) and sensory-semantic (Nelson, Reed, & McEvoy, 1977) models of picture and word processing are discussed. The results suggest that the semantic representations of objects that are perceptually distinct but share a common name are not identical, and that the effect of naming such objects is to insure that a distinct semantic representation becomes a part of the resulting memory code.     

Why do non-color words interfere with color naming?

In the non-color-word Stroop task, university students' response latencies were longer for low-frequency than for higher frequency target words. Visual identity primes facilitated color naming in groups reading the prime silently or processing it semantically (Experiment 1) but did not when participants generated a rhyme of the prime (Experiment 3). With auditory identity primes, generating an associate or a rhyme of the prime produced interference (Experiments 2 and 3). Color-naming latencies were longer for nonwords than for words (Experiment 4). There was a small long-term repetition benefit in color naming for low-frequency words that had been presented in the lexical decision task (Experiment 5). Facilitation of word recognition speeds color naming except when phonological activation of the base word increases response competition.     

Rapid automatized naming in children referred for evaluation of heterogeneous learning problems: how specific are naming speed deficits to reading disability?

Because the Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) test reliably predicts reading skill, it is typically viewed as a diagnostic indicator of risk for reading disability (RD). Since most of the work on naming speed has been undertaken within the framework of reading research, however, the extent to which poor RAN is specifically associated with RD or with learning impairment (LI) in general is uncertain. We tested the hypothesis that slow naming speed is specific to RD. Participants were 188 children (ages 7 to 11) referred for evaluation of learning problems. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to evaluate the utility of the RAN task for classifying children in diagnostic groups. RAN was an excellent tool for detecting risk for learning problems in general, but it was much less effective at distinguishing LI children with and without RD from each other.     

Regularity effects in word naming: What are they?

In a word-naming experiment, word-body consistency was crossed with grapheme-to-phoneme regularity to test predictions of current models of word recognition. In the latency and error data, a clear effect of consistency was observed, with the influence of regularity somewhat weaker. In addition, simulation data from three contemporary models of word recognition were obtained for the stimuli used in the experiment in order to compare the models' latencies with those of humans. The simulations showed that the human latency data are most consistent with the parallel-distributed-processing model of Plaut, McClelland, Seidenberg, and Patterson (1996), less so with the dual-process model (Zorzi, Houghton, & Butterworth, 1998), and least so with the dual-route-cascaded model (Coltheart & Rastle, 1994).     

What exactly interacts with spelling-sound consistency in word naming?

Word frequency, age of acquisition (AoA), and imageability were combined with spelling-sound consistency, and their effects on word naming were examined. Frequency and AoA interacted with consistency (Experiments 1 and 2). Imageability did not (Experiment 3). Experiment 4 replicated Experiment 2 of E. Strain, K. E. Patterson, and M. S. Seidenberg's (1995) study and obtained the same apparent effect of imageability on naming. That effect disappeared when AoA was entered as a covariate. An explanation of the interactions of consistency with frequency and AoA is offered in terms of the properties of adaptive connectionist networks given gradual and cumulative training.     

Inflated and contradictory category naming deficits in Alzheimer's disease?

Although some studies have documented category-specific deficits in patients with Alzheimer's disease, others have not. One possible reason is that where control groups have been used in previous studies, they have performed at ceiling; and this may spuriously affect the incidence and type of deficit reported (especially with common statistical techniques such as z-scores). We examined this issue in 18 Alzheimer's patients and 26 elderly controls, who named two picture sets: a simple set that typically produces ceiling effects (Set 1) and one that produces a normal distribution in controls (Set 2). Sets 1 and 2 produced inconsistent and even contradictory deficits in the same patients. The results also show that ceiling effects may inflate the number of living thing deficits and hence, distort the reported ratio of living to nonliving cases.     

When are implicit agents Encoded? Evidence from cross-modal naming.

A cross-modal naming task was used to investigate when readers access and use semantic argument information to integrate a verb into the representation of a sentence. Previous research has shown that readers include implicit agents as part of their understanding of short passive sentences like The door was shut but not in intransitive sentences like The door shut. We demonstrate that implicit agents are accessed immediately upon recognizing a passive verb. Additionally, our results suggest that cross-modal naming is sensitive to some types of lexically encoded semantic information.     

Does sunshine prime loyal? Affective priming in the naming task

Recent work has found an affective priming effect using the naming task: In pronouncing target words, pronunciation latencies were consistently shorter when the target (e.g., loyal) was preceded by an evaluatively congruent (e.g., sunshine) rather than incongruent prime word (e.g, rain). Using the naming task, no affective priming was found in the present studies irrespective of prime-set size and target-set size (Experiment 1), irrespective of stimulus-onset asynchrony (Experiment 2), and even when a nearly exact replication of previous work that demonstrated the effect was conducted (Experiment 3). Finally, bilingual German/English speakers exhibited strong associative priming, but no affective priming, in both the English as well as the German language (Experiment 4). The results show that priming for evaluatively related words is not a general finding.     

Speed of processing explains the picture–word asymmetry in conditional naming

In this study, we investigated picture (Experiments 1 and 2) and word (Experiments 3 and 4) processing using different tasks. In Experiments 1 and 3, easy and difficult conditional naming tasks were compared to a free naming task. In Experiments 2 and 4, easy and difficult conditional naming tasks were compared to easy and difficult manual forced-choice semantic decision tasks. For pictures, we showed that a difficult semantic categorization determined a cost for the conditional naming with respect to the free naming (Experiment 1). Also, we found that the difference in RTs between the easy and difficult conditional naming tasks was much smaller than the difference between the easy and difficult forced-choice semantic decision tasks (Experiment 2). For words, results showed that free reading was faster than easy conditional reading, which in turn was faster than difficult conditional reading (Experiment 3). An analogous pattern of results was obtained when the easy and difficult conditional reading tasks were compared to the easy and difficult forced-choice semantic decision tasks (Experiment 4). Globally, the results showed that whether a cost is observed or not depends upon the relative timing of the classification and name retrieval processes. A theoretical framework has been proposed.     

Why naming takes longer than reading? The special case of Arabic numbers

Since the work of Cattell, 1885 and Cattell, 1886, it is known that the time to name an object (or a color, a geometric figure, a drawing) is longer than the time to read the name of that object. This result has been confirmed by many authors but the explanation of this phenomenon is still lacking. One good explanation of the reading–naming time difference is the uncertainty factor. Whereas words are associated with a single response name, pictures are linked to several names (the so-called “uncertainty hypothesis”). Another good explanation of this difference is the obligatory retrieval of meaning for pictures but not for words (the so-called “semantic hypothesis”). In the present experiments, subjects had to name Arabic numbers and their corresponding written names. By using Arabic numbers and their corresponding written names, we contrasted these two hypotheses proposed to explain the reading–naming time difference. We exploited the fact that Arabic numbers share a very important attribute with their corresponding written names: their uncertainty is null. Indeed, there is only one way to name 5 and five. Our results suggest that the main factor responsible for this reading–naming time difference is the uncertainty factor, since uncertainty being equal, this difference disappeared completely throughout ten (Experiment 1) and five repeated sessions (Experiment 2).     

Homophonic context effects when naming Japanese kanji: evidence for processing costs?

The current study investigated the effects of phonologically related context pictures on the naming latencies of target words in Japanese and Chinese. Reading bare words in alphabetic languages has been shown to be rather immune to effects of context stimuli, even when these stimuli are presented in advance of the target word (e.g., Glaser & Düngelhoff, 1984 ; Roelofs, 2003 ). However, recently, semantic context effects of distractor pictures on the naming latencies of Japanese kanji (but not Chinese hànzì) words have been observed (Verdonschot, La Heij, & Schiller, 2010 ). In the present study, we further investigated this issue using phonologically related (i.e., homophonic) context pictures when naming target words in either Chinese or Japanese. We found that pronouncing bare nouns in Japanese is sensitive to phonologically related context pictures, whereas this is not the case in Chinese. The difference between these two languages is attributed to processing costs caused by multiple pronunciations for Japanese kanji.     

Omissions and semantic errors in aphasic naming: is there a link?

Within a discrete two-stage model of lexicalization, semantic errors and errors of omission are assumed to be independent events. In contrast, cascading and interactive models allow for an influence of word form on lexical selection and thus for an inherent relationship in accounting for both error types. A group of 17 aphasic patients was assessed with a naming test controlling for semantic competition of the target items. Semantic errors were more frequent for targets with many competitors than for targets with few competitors while omissions were more frequent when few competitors were available. However, the overall sums of errors in both item groups were comparable. These results imply a common source of both error types and thus speak against a strictly serial model of naming.     

Will Julia Roberts harm Nicole Kidman? Semantic priming effects during face naming

Three experiments are reported, which examine whether face naming is vulnerable to semantic competition in a similar way to object naming. Previous experiments with object naming have shown that a related prime picture presented 3 trials before a target picture results in an increase in error rate and naming latencies when compared to unrelated prime conditions. The experiments here use the same paradigm, with errors as the main dependent variable. In Experiment 1, the prime and target faces were from the same occupational category (e.g., politicians, actors), and in Experiment 2, the primes and target faces were also associated to each other. In Experiment 3, the prime was presented as a name to be read aloud. Unrelated filler stimuli intervened between prime and target. In all experiments, there was a reduction in target-naming errors in the related conditions, and in Experiment 3 this was shown to be largely a reduction in naming failures. The results suggest that related name representations for famous people are not activated in parallel and in competition, and that there is some evidence for a relatively long lasting facilitatory effect. These results require some modification to any serial account of face naming to differentiate it from the generally well-established serial account of object naming.     

Will Julia Roberts harm Nicole Kidman? Semantic priming effects during face naming

Three experiments are reported, which examine whether face naming is vulnerable to semantic competition in a similar way to object naming. Previous experiments with object naming have shown that a related prime picture presented 3 trials before a target picture results in an increase in error rate and naming latencies when compared to unrelated prime conditions. The experiments here use the same paradigm, with errors as the main dependent variable. In Experiment 1, the prime and target faces were from the same occupational category (e.g., politicians, actors), and in Experiment 2, the primes and target faces were also associated to each other. In Experiment 3, the prime was presented as a name to be read aloud. Unrelated filler stimuli intervened between prime and target. In all experiments, there was a reduction in target-naming errors in the related conditions, and in Experiment 3 this was shown to be largely a reduction in naming failures. The results suggest that related name representations for famous people are not activated in parallel and in competition, and that there is some evidence for a relatively long lasting facilitatory effect. These results require some modification to any serial account of face naming to differentiate it from the generally well-established serial account of object naming.