The semantic/episodic distinction: The case for social information processing

The directed-forgetting paradigm was used in order to dissociate episodic from semantic processes in an impression formation task. Results demonstrate that incongruent behaviors are more prone to manipulations that disrupt episodic memory, whereas congruent behaviors are unaffected by such manipulations. The results suggest that the distinction between episodic and semantic memory processes is central for the understanding of social information processing. An explanation is put forward according to which the incongruency effect, a signature effect of impression formation, is due to an episodic encoding advantage for incongruent behaviors because of their semantically isolated nature, and their impoverished semantic encoding.     

More on the distinction between episodic and semantic memories

In reply to a critique of the episodic/semantic distinction (McKoon, Ratcliff, & Dell, 1986), Tulving (1986) argues that the usual rules for testing theories do not apply to the classification of phenomena with respect to memory systems. But we respond that the classification methods proposed by Tulving (1986) may be detrimental to the advancement of theory and that whole domains of inquiry should not be excluded from the usual criteria of experimental psychology.     

The contribution of autobiographical significance to semantic memory

We examined the importance of autobiographical significance (AS) in the representation and organization of semantic memory by examining which famous people are most likely to be associated with specific personal memories and whether or not this AS can be distinguished from other factors, such as familiarity. Norming studies with 45- to 55-year-old and 65- to 80-year-old participants suggested that AS is distinct from familiarity and that it interacts closely with emotional salience. Furthermore, in a set of experiments, we tested the hypothesis that AS is an important organizing principle in long-term episodic and semantic memory by contrasting performances on tests of recall, recognition, fame judgment, and speeded reading for famous names judged to be of either high or low personal relevance. Participants demonstrated a performance advantage (i.e., enhanced memory and faster responding) for autobiographically significant famous names, regardless of whether their own judgments or others' judgments were used to classify the names. The implications of these findings for models of semantic memory are discussed.     

Evaluating the semantic categories hypothesis: The case of the count/mass distinction

It is often claimed that grammatical categories are initially acquired via their semantic properties. In the case of the count/mass distinction, semantic correlations should predispose the child to acquire the count/mass subcategories as a distinction between names for objects vs. substances. This proposal is tested in three experiments. The first two experiments with 3- to 5-year-olds employ a word-learning paradigm in which semantic and syntactic cues are either in conflict, in accord or in isolation. Results demonstrate that syntactic cues are clearly the most effective and predominate over semantic cues as a basis for subcategorization. The third experiment with 2- to 5-year-olds demonstrates that children do not miscategorize nouns whose semantic properties are either inappropriate or indeterminate. Thus, for example, they do not tend to miscategorize a term such as “furniture” which is a mass noun yet denotes a class of objects. These results suggest that the count/mass distinction is not acquired via an object/substance distinction although semantic properties of quantification are probably important for the acquisition process.     

Psychobiological evidence for the distinction between episodic and semantic memory

The evidence for discrete neurobiological mechanisms that underlie episodic and semantic memory is reviewed. Published data from three separate lines of research are considered: studies of human amnesic patients, psychopharmacological studies of normal human subjects, and studies of working and reference memory in rodents, a distinction that is arguably analogous to the episodic/semantic dichotomy. It is concluded that the available evidence does not indicate that episodic and semantic memory are mediated by discrete neural subsystems. An alternative model of human memory is discussed, based on the concept of parallel distributed processing.An earlier version of this paper was submitted as part of the author's qualifying examination at Emory University.     

A distinction between the effects of sentential speaking rate and semantic congruity on word identification

It is well known that numerous aspects of sentential context can influence the manner in which a word within the sentence is identified. We investigated two such contextual effects, that of the speaking rate of the sentence in which the target word occurs and that of the semantic congruence between the sentence and the target word. We observed that although the two effects are similar on the surface, in that each is realized as a change in the identification of acoustically ambiguous (but not unambiguous) items along a speech series, they are strikingly different in their susceptibility to changes in task demands. Specifically, changes in the task that readily eliminate the semantic congruity effect do not serve to eliminate the rate effect, suggesting that the two effects arise at different stages of analysis. The implications of this finding for models of speech processing are discussed.     

Semantic and syntactic aspects of the mass/count distinction: a case study of semantic dementia

Semantic and syntactic contributions to processing of mass and count nouns were assessed by examining the performance of a patient suffering from a pure semantic deficit. Semantic and syntactic processing was evaluated on grammaticality judgement and sentence-picture matching tasks, respectively, where each task involved mass and count readings of metonymic nouns. While the patient did not show impaired performance on the grammaticality judgment task, he manifested difficulties in making mass/count distinctions in the sentence-picture matching task. It is thus argued that while distributionally the mass/count distinction may be established on a purely syntactic basis, cognitive processing of mass/count information requires both intact syntactic and semantic knowledge.     

The rules versus similarity distinction

The distinction between rules and similarity is central to our understanding of much of cognitive psychology. Two aspects of existing research have motivated the present work. First, in different cognitive psychology areas we typically see different conceptions of rules and similarity; for example, rules in language appear to be of a different kind compared to rules in categorization. Second, rules processes are typically modeled as separate from similarity ones; for example, in a learning experiment, rules and similarity influences would be described on the basis of separate models. In the present article, I assume that the rules versus similarity distinction can be understood in the same way in learning, reasoning, categorization, and language, and that a unified model for rules and similarity is appropriate. A rules process is considered to be a similarity one where only a single or a small subset of an object's properties are involved. Hence, rules and overall similarity operations are extremes in a single continuum of similarity operations. It is argued that this viewpoint allows adequate coverage of theory and empirical findings in learning, reasoning, categorization, and language, and also a reassessment of the objectives in research on rules versus similarity.     

The teleological/deontological distinction

Conclusion In almost every introductory ethics course the student is taught that there are two basic kinds of moral theories: teleological and deontological. If the conclusions of this paper are correct, this practice must stop. As a minimum, discussion of the teleological/deontological distinction should be replaced by discussions of the axiological/deontological distinction. In addition, the student should be introduced to various of the other fundamental classificatory distinctions. This, I believe, will result in more penetrating theory criticism, and more creative theory construction. The hegemony of the teleological/deontological distinction must end.

---

     

Investigating semantic memory impairments: The contribution of semantic priming

Abstract

The semantic priming task is a valuable tool in the investigation of semantic memory impairments in patients with acquired disorders of language. This is because priming performance reflects automatic or implicit access to semantic information, unlike most other tests of semantic knowledge, which rely on explicit, voluntary access. Priming results are important for two main reasons: First, normal priming results may be observed in patients who perform poorly on other semantic memory tests, enabling us to distinguish between loss of, or damage to, information in semantic memory, and voluntary access to that information. Second, we can investigate the detailed pattern of loss and preservation of different types of semantic information, by charting the priming effects for different kinds of words, and different kinds of semantic relations between primes and targets.

We discuss the use of the priming task in this context, and address some of the theoretical and methodological criticisms that have been raised in connection with use of the priming task to address these issues. We then describe two recent studies in which we have employed semantic priming tasks, along with other more traditional methods, to investigate specific questions about the semantic memory deficits of three patients.