汉语词汇产生中语义、字形和音韵激活的时间进程

通过图画－词汇干扰实验范式探索汉语单字词产生中语义、字形和语音激活的时间进程。实验一和实验二的结果综合表明：当SOA为-300 ms~0 ms时,存在语义抑制效应,当SOA为-100 ms~100 ms时,存在字形促进效应,当SOA为100 ms时,存在语音促进效应。实验结果支持交互激活理论的观点。实验成功地分离了字形促进效应和语音促进效应,确定了语义、字形和语音这三种信息在汉语口语词汇产生中通达的先后次序,讨论了字形信息在词汇产生中的重要作用,以及被试是否在实验中使用了策略。     

图画口语命名中的语义效应

图画口语命名包括了概念准备、词条选择、音韵编码和发音等加工阶段, 是口语产生研究中经典的实验任务。文章首先简要介绍了两类言语产生的基础理论, 然后介绍了不同研究范式下的语义抑制效应与语义促进效应。在此基础上总结了影响语义效应的各种因素, 并重点介绍了竞争说、动态词汇网络假说、反应一致说、语义选择说以及反应排除说。最后基于已有的研究成果与研究现状指出了下一步的研究方向。     

汉语口语句子产生的语法编码计划单元

语法编码的计划单元作为口语句子产生领域的一个重要命题,近年来备受心理语言学者的关注。本研究利用词图干扰范式下的语义效应,通过两个行为实验探讨了汉语口语句子产生中的语法编码计划单元。实验中要求被试用介词短语做主语的句子或者并列名词短语做主语的句子来命名两个竖直排列的图片,并视觉呈现干扰词。结果表明,对于两个句式而言,在第二个名词上都没有潜伏期的语义干扰效应,只有错误率上的语义干扰效应,而且这个结果并没有随着SOA(目标图片和干扰词开始呈现的时间间隔)的改变(0、150或300ms)而改变。当干扰词与图片同时呈现时(SOA=0)在并列名词短语做主语的句子中,第二个名词上出现了潜伏期的语义促进效应。这些结果说明,语法编码的说法较为宽泛,应具体描述为:词汇选择是严格递进的,而概念激活的计划单元可能是功能短语。     

图-词干扰范式下汉语口吃者的语义编码

采用图-词干扰范式, 通过2个实验考察了汉语口吃者的语义编码。实验1发现, 在基本水平命名中,口吃者与非口吃者均表现出语义干扰效应, 语义相关干扰词的命名时间显著长于语义无关干扰词的命名时间, 口吃者在语义相关干扰条件下所受到的干扰比非口吃者大; 在类别水平命名中, 口吃者与非口吃者的表现类似, 都表现出语义促进效应, 语义相关干扰词的命名时间显著短于语义无关干扰词的命名时间, 语义相关干扰词的命名错误率也显著低于语义无关干扰词的命名错误率。实验2发现, 在基本水平命名中, 当SOA为-200 ms、-100 ms和0 ms时, 语义相关干扰条件下的反应时显著长于在语义无关干扰条件下的反应时, 当SOA为-100 ms和0 ms时, 口吃者的语义干扰效应比非口吃者更加明显。整个研究表明, 口吃者的语义编码出现了延缓, 口吃者比非口吃者需要更多的时间来排除语义干扰词的干扰。研究结果在一定程度上支持了关于口吃的多因素模型。     

图词干扰范式下的语义效应

图-词干扰范式下存在着语义干扰效应（semanticinterferenceeffects,SIE）。研究发现,在图-词干扰范式下,语义干扰词对图片命名或者起干扰作用,或者起促进作用。产生这两种截然不同的语义效应的机制很复杂。主要有两种假说：⑴词汇选择竞争说：认为当干扰词和目标图画有语义关联时,干扰词和目标图画所对应的概念表征相互激活,从而造成语义干扰,词汇节点要通过竞争才能得到选择。⑵相对范畴水平说：认为决定语义效应及效应大小的关键因素是干扰词和目标词之间的范畴水平,如果干扰词和目标图画处在同一范畴的相同水平,则产生语义干扰;如果干扰词和目标图画处在同一范畴的不同水平,则产生语义促进。文章回顾了已有的研究及各种假说的争论,并对未来研究进行了展望     

汉语词汇产生中音、形、义三种信息激活的时间进程

采用图-词干扰范式和图片命名方法,探讨语音、语义、字形在汉语词汇产生中激活的时间进程与特点。选择与目标图片名称(如“羊”)具有同音(“阳”)、语义相联(“牛”)、字形相似(“丰”)或无关控制(“冷”)等四种关系的干扰字,依SOA条件呈现在将要被命名的图片上,发现图片命名时间受干扰字的影响：语义干扰效应存在于较早期的SOA(0ms)条件中,在较晚期SOA(150ms)时有很大的减弱;语音促进效应和字形促进效应同时强烈地存在于早期和晚期SOA。实验发现了词条选择(语义激活)和音位编码(语音提取)在激活时间上的重叠现象,与传统的独立两阶段模型的预期存在明显矛盾,倾向于支持交互作用理论的观点。     

汉语口语词汇产生中的多重音韵激活：单词翻译任务的ERP研究

口语词汇产生过程中, 非目标词是否会产生音韵激活是独立两阶段模型和交互激活模型的争论焦点之一。研究运用事件相关电位技术, 考察了被试在翻译命名任务中是否受到背景图片音韵或语义干扰词的影响。行为反应时中未发现显著的音韵效应, 而语义效应显著, 表明非目标词不会产生音韵激活。事件相关电位的结果显示在目标单词呈现后的400~600 ms时间窗口中出现了显著的语义效应, 在600~700 ms时间窗口内出现了边缘显著的语义效应和音韵效应, 均表现为相关条件比无关条件波幅更正。上述结果表明在将英语翻译成汉语的过程中, 尽管在脑电上呈现出可能存在微弱的多重音韵激活, 但行为结果并不会显示出非目标项的音韵激活。研究结果支持了汉语口语词汇产生遵循独立两阶段模式的观点。     

汉语口语词汇产生的音韵编码单元：内隐启动范式的ERP研究

本研究中选择英语水平低的汉语母语者, 排除作为二语的英语音韵编码单元(音素)可能对汉语口语词汇产生过程的影响后, 运用事件相关电位技术, 考察了汉语口语产生过程中音节和音素效应的时间进程。实验采用内隐启动范式, 要求被试看到提示词之后说出对应的目标词。事件相关电位分析结果发现, 音节效应出现在线索词呈现后的100~400 ms之间, 音素效应出现在500~600 ms之间, 波形表现为相关条件比无关条件的波形更正。这表明在词汇选择之后的音韵编码阶段讲话者首先提取的单元是音节, 而音素效应出现的时间窗口可能是音韵编码阶段后期或者是语音编码阶段, 结果验证了合适编码单元假说的观点。     

非平衡双语者Stroop效应的时间进程

运用Stroop任务的SOA范式,考察中-英双语者干扰和易化效应的时间进程及程度,比较双语者认知控制和词汇通达的差异。结果发现,在中文条件下,干扰效应的峰值发生在SOA为-200ms时,在英文条件下,最大的干扰效应发生在SOA为-300 ms时,由此可见,干扰效应时间出现了负转换。在英文条件下,-400ms SOA引发了最大的易化效应,而中文条件下最大的易化效应发生在-300ms SOA。该研究表明,双语者没有表现出认知优势,在Stroop任务中受到了词汇通达的影响。     

汉语口语产生中音节和音段的促进和抑制效应

采用图画-词汇干扰实验范式, 通过比较即时命名、延迟命名以及延迟命名与发音抑制任务的结合, 考察了汉语口语产生中音节和音段在单词形式编码的不同阶段所产生的效应。与无关条件相比, 在包含音韵编码、语音编码和发音阶段的即时命名任务中, 音节相关和音段相关条件显著地缩短了图画命名时间, 表现出音节和音段促进效应; 在包含发音阶段的延迟命名任务中, 音节相关和音段相关条件显著地延长了图画命名的时间, 表现出音节和音段抑制效应; 在包含语音编码和发音阶段的延迟命名和发音抑制结合的任务中, 音段相关条件显著地延长了图画命名时间, 表现出音段抑制效应。结果表明, 音节和音段的促进效应发生在汉语口语词汇产生中的音韵编码阶段, 音节和音段的抑制效应可能发生在语音编码或者发音阶段。效果量(Cohen d)的分析表明音节的促进效应强, 而音段的促进效应弱, 音节是音韵编码过程的合适单元, 为合适单元假设提供了支持证据。与音节相比, 音段在语音编码和发音阶段的效应量较大, 表明音段在运动执行过程中可能起了相对重要的作用, 支持了口语产生中词汇表征准备阶段与运动阶段分离的观点。     

On the categorical nature of the semantic interference effect in the picture-word interference paradigm

Two picture-word interference experiments are reported in which the boundaries of the semantic interference effect are explored. In both experiments, participants named pictures (e.g., a picture of a car) that appeared with superimposed word distractors. Distractor words from the same semantic category as the word for the picture (e.g., CAR) produced semantic interference, whereas semantically related distractors from a different category (e.g.,Bumper) led to semantic facilitation. In Experiment 2, the semantic facilitation from semantically related distractors was replicated. These results indicate that a semantic relationship between picture and distractor does not necessarily lead to interference and in fact can lead to facilitation. In all but one case tested until now, a semantic relationship between picture and distractor has led to semantic facilitation. The implications of these results for the assumption that the semantic interference effect arises as a consequence of lexical competition are discussed.     

语义相似性与类别大小对图-词干扰范式下语义效应的影响

采用基本水平命名和类别水平命名任务, 通过2个实验, 考察了图-词之间的语义相似性与类别大小对图-词干扰范式下语义效应的影响。实验1发现, 图片命名时间在语义相似性高的干扰词条件下显著快于在语义相似性低的干扰词条件下, 但这种效应只出现在基本水平命名任务中, 未出现在类别水平命名任务中。图-词之间的语义相似性高低对低熟悉图片命名影响大, 对高熟悉图片命名影响小。实验2显示, 语义关联的干扰词对图片的基本水平命名产生了语义干扰效应, 对图片的类别水平命名产生了语义促进效应。类别大小强化了语义效应：类别大, 图片的基本水平命名的语义干扰效应更大, 图片的类别水平命名的语义促进效应更强。整个研究表明, 图-词之间的语义关联的强度影响语义效应的方向, 图-词之间的语义关联的广度影响语义效应的强弱。需要结合多种理论来解释图-词之间的语义相似性和类别大小对图-词干扰范式下语义效应的影响。     

Is visual lexical access based on phonological codes? Evidence from a picture-word interference task

The claim that lexical access for visual words is mandatorily mediated by their phonological codes was investigated. Ninety-six subjects performed timed naming responses to pictures while instructed to ignore printed words superimposed on the pictures. Distractor words were either semantically related to the picture label or were homophones of a word semantically related to the picture name. On the basis of the claim that homophones initially activate multiple semantic codes, we hypothesized that the homophone and semantic distractors would yield comparable interference. Picture-word stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) was varied between subjects as 0 or +100 msec. For an SOA of 0 msec, semantic interference, but no effect from the homophones, was obtained. For an SOA of +100 msec, no effect was obtained in either condition. In combination, these findings indicate a limited role of phonological codes in visual lexical access. It is suggested that the role of phonology in written word identification may vary dependent on procedure and utility to the task.     

Locus of semantic interference in picture-word interference tasks

Picture#x2014;word interference studies typically show that semantically related distractor words embedded within a picture slow picture-naming responses, relative to unrelated ones. This semantic interference effect is commonly interpreted as arising from the competition of lexical#x2014;semantic (e.g., Schriefers, Meyer, & Levelt, 1990) or lexical#x2014;phonological (e.g., Starreveld & La Heij, 1996) codes. The experiment reported here tests a crucial assumption shared by these accounts#x2014;namely, that the effect reflects a lexical, rather than a nonverbal, conceptual conflict. Pictures were named while participants attempted to ignore embedded distractors that were in either verbal or pictorial format. The presence of both words and pictures substantially interfered with naming responses, but only words, not pictures, were found to induce semantic interference. These findings support the claim that for semantic interference to arise, both target picture and distractor have to be lexicalized. Consequently, a general conceptual locus of the effect can be excluded, and the claim that semantic interference is based on a lexical conflict is confirmed.     

About the locus of the distractor frequency effect: Evidence from the production of clitic pronouns

In this study, we report results from two experiments in which pictures were shown with superimposed distractors that varied along two dimensions: frequency (high vs. low) and semantic relation with respect to the picture (related vs. unrelated). In one condition of Experiment 1, participants named pictures with a noun utterance; in the other condition of Experiment 1 and in Experiment 2 participants named pictures with a pronominal utterance. Low frequency distractor words produced greater interference with respect to high frequency words in noun production, but not in pronoun production. Critically, a semantic interference effect, greater interference in the semantically related than unrelated condition, was reported in both experiments, suggesting that distractor words were equally processed in both noun and pronoun conditions. These results are discussed in the context of current models of picture–word interference.     

Semantic component of a cross-modal Stroop-like task

Three experiments showed that the pattern of interference of single-modality Stroop tests also exists cross-modally. Distractors and targets were either pictures or auditory words. In a naming task (Experiment 1), word distractors from the same semantic category as picture targets interfered with picture naming more than did semantically unrelated distractors; the semantic category of picture distractors did not differentially affect word naming. In a categorization task (Experiment 2), this Stroop-like effect was reversed: Picture distractors from the same semantic category as word targets interfered less with word categorization than picture distractors that were semantically unrelated; the semantic category of word distractors did not differentially affect picture categorization. Experiment 3 replicated these effects when each subject performed both tasks; the task, naming or categorizing, determined the pattern of interference between pictures and auditory words. The results thus support the existence of a semantic component of a cross-modal Stroop-like effect.     

The activation of word class information during speech production

In 5 picture-word interference experiments the activation of word class information was investigated. The first experiment, in which subjects used bare nouns to describe the pictures, failed to reveal any interference effect of noun distractor words as opposed to closed-class distractor words. In the next 4 experiments the pictures were named by using a definite determiner and the noun completing a sentence fragment. The data demonstrate that noun distractors interfere more strongly with picture naming than do non-noun distractors. This held for both visual and auditory presentation of the distractor words. The interference effect showed up in a time window where semantic interference can usually be observed, supporting the assumption that at an early stage of lexical access semantic and syntactic activation processes overlap.     

Lexical selection is not by competition: a reinterpretation of semantic interference and facilitation effects in the picture-word interference paradigm

The dominant view in the field of lexical access in speech production maintains that selection of a word becomes more difficult as the levels of activation of nontarget words increase--selection by competition. The authors tested this prediction in two sets of experiments. First, the authors show that participants are faster to name pictures of objects (e.g., "bed") in the context of semantically related verb distractors (e.g., sleep) compared with unrelated verb distractors (e.g., shoot). In the second set of experiments, the authors show that target naming latencies (e.g., "horse") are, if anything, faster for within--category semantically close distractor words (e.g., zebra) than for within--category semantically far distractor words (e.g., whale). In the context of previous research, these data ground a new empirical generalization: As distractor words become semantically closer to the target concepts--all else being equal--target naming is facilitated. This fact means that lexical selection does not involve competition, and consequently, that the semantic interference effect does not reflect a lexical level process. This conclusion has important implications for models of lexical access and interpretations of Stroop-like interference effects.     

Feature overlap slows lexical selection: Evidence from the picture–word interference paradigm

How does the presence of a categorically related word influence picture naming latencies? In order to test competitive and noncompetitive accounts of lexical selection in spoken word production, we employed the picture–word interference (PWI) paradigm to investigate how conceptual feature overlap influences naming latencies when distractors are category coordinates of the target picture. Mahon et al. (2007. Lexical selection is not by competition: A reinterpretation of semantic interference and facilitation effects in the picture-word interference paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33(3), 503–535. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.33.3.503) reported that semantically close distractors (e.g., zebra) facilitated target picture naming latencies (e.g., HORSE) compared to far distractors (e.g., whale). We failed to replicate a facilitation effect for within-category close versus far target–distractor pairings using near-identical materials based on feature production norms, instead obtaining reliably larger interference effects (Experiments 1 and 2). The interference effect did not show a monotonic increase across multiple levels of within-category semantic distance, although there was evidence of a linear trend when unrelated distractors were included in analyses (Experiment 2). Our results show that semantic interference in PWI is greater for semantically close than for far category coordinate relations, reflecting the extent of conceptual feature overlap between target and distractor. These findings are consistent with the assumptions of prominent competitive lexical selection models of speech production.