Masked priming with graphemically related forms: Repetition or partial activation?

Form-priming occurs when a prime that is graphemically similar to the target word facilitates processing of the target. In an activation model (such as Morton's logogen model), such an effect can be interpreted as a partial-activation effect. A prime that shares letters with the target must inevitably produce activation in the detectors for both the prime and the target. Alternatively, form-priming could be seen as a special case of repetition-priming, in which the prime actually accesses the entry for the target. It is shown that masked-priming effects in the lexical decision task can be obtained for graphemically related pairs such as bontrast-CONTRAST, but not for four-letter pairs such as bamp-CAMP. It is suggested that the priming effect is controlled by neighbourhood density, short words usually having many neighbours, long words having very few. This hypothesis is supported by the finding that form-priming does occur for four-letter words if the prime and target are drawn from low-density neighbourhoods. For a partial-activation theory, an inhibitory mechanism that is sensitive to the number of prime-neighbours is required to explain the results. Of the several versions of a repetition account considered, the “best match” hypothesis appears to be the most promising: this assumes that priming is limited to the stimulus that best matches the prime. It is also shown that prime-target pairs that are related in form and meaning (e.g. made-MAKE) produce the same priming effect as identical pairs, as predicted by a repetition account that assumes a common entry underlying both forms.     

Priming and the effects of sentence and lexical contexts on naming time: Evidence for autonomous lexical processing

Models of language processing which stress the autonomy of processing at each level predict that the semantic properties of an incomplete sentence context should have no influence on lexical processing, either facilitatory or inhibitory. An experiment similar to those reported by Fischler and Bloom (1979) and Stanovich and West (1979, 1981) was conducted using naming time as an index of lexical access time. No facilitatory effects of context were observed for either highly predictable or semantically appropriate (but unpredictable) completions, whereas strong inhibitory effects were obtained for inappropriate completions. When lexical decision time was the dependent measure, the same results were obtained, except that predictable completions now produced strong facilitation. In a further experiment the inhibitory effects of context on lexical decision times for inappropriate targets were maintained, even though unfocussed contexts were used, in which no clear expectancy for a particular completion was involved. These results were interpreted in terms of a two-factor theory which attributes the facilitation observed with the lexical decision task to postaccess decision processes which are not involved in the naming task. The inhibitory effects were attributed to interference resulting from semantic integration. In contrast to the results for sentence contexts, lexical contexts of the doctor-nurse variety produced clear facilitation effects on naming time (but no inhibitory effects). It was also shown that relatively minor variations in the type of neutral context could completely alter the relative importance of facilitation and inhibition.