The locus of the frequency effect in picture naming: When recognizing is not enough

The lexical frequency effect in picture naming is generally assumed to constitute a signature of lexical access. Lexical frequency, however, is correlated with other variables, like concept familiarity, that can produce effects similar to those of lexical frequency in picture naming tasks. In this study, a delayed picture naming task was employed to address the hypothesis that the frequency effect in picture naming is due to variables that affect processing in the perceptual and semantic identification stages (i.e., input stages). Despite the fact that all the input processing stages were completed prior to the presentation of the naming cue, a strong frequency effect was still obtained in this task. These results establish that the lexical frequency effect is independent of variables affecting the input stages of picture naming, and, hence, confirm the lexical frequency effect as a signature effect of lexical access.     

Orthographic structure and deaf spelling errors: Syllables, letter frequency, and speech

Syllable structure influences hearing students' reading and spelling (e.g., Badecker, 1996; Caramazza & Miceli, 1990; Prinzmetal, Treiman, & Rho, 1986; Rapp, 1992; Treiman & Zukowski, 1988). This may seem unsurprising since hearers closely associate written and spoken words. We analysed a corpus of spelling errors made by deaf students. They would have learned English orthography with an attenuated experience of speech. Wefound that the majority of their errors were phonologically implausible but orthographically legal. A tendency to replace uncommon letter sequences with common sequences could not account for this pattern, nor could residual influence from speech. Since syllabically defined constraints are required to keep sequences orthographically legal, the deaf data are marked by an influence of syllable structure. Two main conclusions follow: (1) Our results contribute to evidence that abstract constraints, not derived from peripheral speech or hearing mechanisms, govern the organization of linguistic knowledge; and (2) statistical redundancy could not explain the deaf results. It does not offer a general alternative to suprasegmental structure.     

Introduction

Sacred Pleasure: Sex, Myth, and the Politics of the Body, by Riane Eisler. Harper San Francisco, 495 pages. $15.00, 1996 paperback edition, ISBN 0–06–250283–2; $25.00, 1995 cloth edition, ISBN 0–06–250293‐x.     

Syntactic processing in the human brain: what we know, what we don't know, and a suggestion for how to proceed

For every claim in the neuroimaging literature about a particular brain region supporting syntactic processing, there exist other claims implicating the target region in different linguistic processes, and, in many cases, in non-linguistic cognitive processes (e.g., Blumstein, 2009). We argue that traditional group analysis methods in neuroimaging may obscure functional specificity because of inter-subject anatomical variability (Fedorenko & Kanwisher, 2009). In Fedorenko, Hsieh, Nieto-Castanon, Whitfield-Gabrieli, and Kanwisher (2010) we presented a functional localizer that allows quick and reliable identification of key language-sensitive regions in each individual brain. This approach enables pooling data from corresponding functional regions across subjects rather than from the same locations in stereotaxic space that may differ functionally due to inter-subject anatomical variability. In the current paper we demonstrate that the individual-subjects functional localization approach is superior to the traditional methods in its ability to distinguish among conditions in a brain region’s response. This ability is at the core of all neuroimaging research and is critical for answering questions of functional specialization (e.g., does a brain region specialize for processing syntactic aspects of the linguistic signal), which is in turn essential for making inferences about the precise computations conducted in each brain region. Based on our results, we argue that supplementing existing methods with an individual-subjects functional localization approach may lead to a clearer picture of the neural basis of syntactic processing, as it has in some other domains, such as high-level vision (e.g., Kanwisher, 2010) and social cognition (e.g., Saxe & Kanwisher, 2003).     

On Merely Modal Epistemic Peers: Challenging the Equal-Weight View

There is a controversy, within social epistemology, over how to handle disagreement among epistemic peers. Call this the problem of peer disagreement. There is a solution, i.e. the equal-weight view, which says that disagreement among epistemic peers is a reason for each peer to lower the credence they place in their respective positions. However, this solution is susceptible to a serious challenge. Call it the merely modal peers challenge. Throughout parts of modal space, which resemble the actual world almost completely, there are hordes of epistemic peers, who disagree with almost any arbitrarily chosen belief had by residents of the actual world. Further, the mere modality of these peers is not itself an epistemic difference-maker. Thus, on the equal-weight view, we should significantly lower the credence we place in most of our beliefs. Surely, this is seriously mistaken. Thus, there are serious considerations that cut against the equal-weight view.     

Reward anticipation enhances brain activation during response inhibition

The chance to achieve a reward starts up the required neurobehavioral mechanisms to adapt our thoughts and actions in order to accomplish our objective. However, reward does not equally reinforce everybody but depends on interindividual motivational dispositions. Thus, immediate reward contingencies can modulate the cognitive process required for goal achievement, while individual differences in personality can affect this modulation. We aimed to test the interaction between inhibition-related brain response and motivational processing in a stop signal task by reward anticipation and whether individual differences in sensitivity to reward (SR) modulate such interaction. We analyzed the cognitive–motivational interaction between the brain pattern activation of the regions involved in correct and incorrect response inhibition and the association between such brain activations and SR scores. We also analyzed the behavioral effects of reward on both reaction times for the “go” trials before and after correct and incorrect inhibition in order to test error prediction performance and postinhibition adjustment. Our results show enhanced activation during response inhibition under reward contingencies in frontal, parietal, and subcortical areas. Moreover, activation of the right insula and the left putamen positively correlates with the SR scores. Finally, the possibility of reward outcome affects not only response inhibition performance (e.g., reducing stop signal reaction time), but also error prediction performance and postinhibition adjustment. Therefore, reward contingencies improve behavioral performance and enhance brain activation during response inhibition, and SR is related to brain activation. Our results suggest the conditions and factors that subserve cognitive control strategies in cognitive motivational interactions during response inhibition.     

False memories in Lewy‐body disease

Recently, de Boysson, Belleville, Phillips et al. (2011) found that patients with Lewy‐body disease (LBD) showed significantly lower rates of false memories than healthy controls, using the Deese–Roediger–McDermott (DRM) experimental procedure. Given that this result could be explained by the practically null rate of true recognition in the LBD group (0.09), we decided to replicate the study by de Boysson et al. (2011), but including a new condition that would maximize the true recognition rate (and analyze its effect on the rate of false memories). Specifically, in a DRM experiment, we manipulated (within subjects) two study and recognition conditions: in the “immediate” condition, both the LBD patients and the control group of healthy older people received a different recognition test after each study list (containing twelve words associated with a non‐presented critical word), while in the “delayed” condition (similar to the one in de Boysson et al., 2011), the participants received the entire series of study lists and then took only one recognition test. The results showed that, in both samples, the “immediate” condition produced higher corrected rates of both true and false recognition than the “delayed” condition, although they were both lower in the LBD patients, which shows that these patients are capable of encoding and recognizing the general similitude underlying information (gist memory) in the right conditions.