From Monroe to Moreau: an analysis of face naming errors.

Functional models of face recognition and speech production have developed separately. However, naming a familiar face is, of course, an act of speech production. In this paper we propose a revision of Bruce and Young's (1986) model of face processing, which incorporates two features of Levelt's (1989) model of speech production. In particular, the proposed model includes two stages of lexical access for names and monitoring of face naming based on a "perceptual loop". Two predictions were derived from the perceptual loop hypothesis of speech monitoring: (1) naming errors in which a (correct) rare surname is erroneously replaced by a common surname should occur more frequently than the reverse substitution (the error asymmetry effect); (2) naming errors in which a common surname is articulated are more likely to be repaired than errors which result in articulation of a rare surname (the error-repairing effect). Both predictions were supported by an analysis of face naming errors in a laboratory face naming task. In a further experiment we considered the possibility that the effects of surname frequency observed in face naming errors could be explained by the frequency sensitivity of lexical access in speech production. However, no effect of the frequency of the surname of the faces used in the previous experiment was found on face naming latencies. Therefore, it is concluded that the perceptual loop hypothesis provides the more parsimonious account of the entire pattern of the results.     

On the concept of language in some recent theories of meaning

The work on this paper was done in the research project V ra begrepp om spr k supported byHumanistisk-samhälls-vetenskapliga forskningsr det. I am indebted to Per Martin-Löf, Hans Ruin, Pär Segerdahl, and Sven Öhman for valuable comments on a previous version of this paper. Thanks to the comments of the anonymous referee I was able to improve some formulations in the paper.     

The relationship between recognition and cued recall in memory of enacted and nonenacted information

Summary An experiment was conducted to determine whether the processes underlying memory for enacted and nonenacted events are the same or different. The experimental paradigm used was that of recognition failure of recallable information. At study subjects were given verbal commands (e.g., break the match, roll the ball), that they were to remember or enact and remember. At test subjects were first asked to recognize the noun in each command in the absence of the verb and then to recall the noun with the verb present as cue. Half the subjects were given the two tests in the reverse order. The results demonstrate that enactment and nonenactment differ with respect to the degree of dependence/independence between recognition and recall. In the enactment condition recognition and cued recall are completely independent and in the nonenactment condition they are almost completely dependent.     

Variations on the Ramsey test: More triviality results

The purpose of this note is to formulate some weaker versions of the so called Ramsey test that do not entail the following unacceptable consequenceIf A and C are already accepted in K, then if A, then C is also accepted in K. and to show that these versions still lead to the same triviality result when combined with a preservation criterion.     

Motivated memory: Dissociation between performance data and subjective reports

Summary Three experiments are reported to test a claim by previous subjects that lack of motivation for performing well in memory experiments yielded less than optimal performance. In each experiment the subjects of one group were informed of monetary incentives prior to study; in a second group they were informed of these incentives after study but prior to the test; no mention of incentives was made to the subjects of a third group. Recall and recognition procedures were used to assess memory performance. The data of all three experiments demonstrated no differences between the three groups with respect to performance. The claim that subjects in regular memory experiments would typically perform less than optimally is thus rejected. Subjective reports, however, revealed that incentives had affected the amount of effort put into the memory tasks. This dissociation between performance data and subjective reports is discussed in relation to the concept of motivation.