| Abstract: | The present study sought to determine if semantic categories processed in context are encoded as particular exemplars. In Experiment 1 we replicated previous results on an extended and modified set of stimuli by showing that when subjects read sentences containing a category term in a context designed to bias encoding toward an atypical exemplar, the atypical exemplar serves as a better retrieval cue than a typical exemplar. In Experiment 2 we tested whether these cued-recall results were due to processes operating at encoding or retrieval. The pattern of semantic interference obtained in a modified Stroop paradigm clearly contradicted the position that readers routinely encode general terms as examples, or "instantiations." In particular, there was significant color-naming interference when typical exemplars served as targets even when preceded by sentences designed to bias encoding toward an atypical exemplar. No significant color-naming interference was generated to atypical exemplars. Experiment 3 ruled out the possibility that differences between the cued-recall and Stroop results in the first two experiments were due to encoding strategy differences. It was concluded that assigning a referent to a category term is not a routine activity in sentence encoding and that processing category terms entails activation of summary representations. |
