Abstract
Caramazza and Costa ( Cognition 75 (2000) B51) reported results which demonstrate that a semantically related word distractor interferes in picture naming even when it is not in the response set and there is no possibility for mediated interference. They interpreted the results to be problematic for the model of lexical access proposed by Levelt, Roelofs, and Meyer ( Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (1999) 1). Roelofs ( Cognition 80 (2001 , this issue) 283–290 argues that those results are not inconsistent with Levelt et al.'s model when certain new assumptions about the mechanism of lexical selection are considered. Here we show that even with these assumptions the model still makes the wrong predictions. We report new results which demonstrate that the semantic interference and facilitation effects that are obtained respectively in the basic-level and category-level naming variants of the picture–word interference paradigm are not the result of response set size and response repetitions.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
