On irrelevant cue trials, the reverse was true Any semantic info

On irrelevant cue trials, the reverse was true. Any semantic information activated

by the cue would compete with the semantic information required for the synonym judgement, increasing demands on semantic control and selection regions. Moreover, the probe word would be processed without the benefit of any contextual framework, leading to impoverished activation of semantic knowledge and reduced activation in areas underpinning semantic representation. 200 synonym judgement trials were generated; 100 featuring concrete words and 100 featuring RG7204 ic50 abstract words. Psycholinguistic properties for the probes and choice words are provided in Table 2. In common with most previous studies, we defined words as concrete or abstract based on ratings of imageability. These were significantly higher for concrete words than for abstract words (t = 82, p < .001). Concrete and abstract trials were matched for log word frequency. The concrete and abstract probes were equal in word length, though the choice words were slightly longer in the abstract condition. Abstract words were also, on average,

lower in concreteness and familiarity than concrete words and were later acquired. We also obtained semantic diversity values for all words, which is a measure of the degree of variation among the different contexts in which a word can be used ( Hoffman, Lambon Ralph, et al., 2013). Abstract TCL words had significantly PS-341 ic50 higher semantic diversity values than concrete words, indicating that they tend to appear in a broader range of linguistic contexts. A contextual cue was created for each trial. The cues were between seven and sixteen words in length and consisted of two sentences that placed the probe word in a particular meaningful context. Each cue ended with the probe word. The length of the cue in concrete versus abstract trials did not differ in terms of words or letters (t < 1.6, p > .1). To generate irrelevant cues, trials were divided into two matched sets A and B and the cues randomly reassigned within each set. Presentation was

counterbalanced such that half of the participants saw the set A trials with contextual cues and set B trials with irrelevant cues, and vice versa for the remaining participants. Participants never saw the same trial or cue more than once. We used latent semantic analysis ( Landauer & Dumais, 1997) as a means of assessing the strength of relationships between the cues, probes and choice words (see Supplementary Materials for details). Critically, we found that contextual cues had a stronger semantic relationship with their probes and targets than did irrelevant cues. We also found that the relationships between contextual cues, probes and targets were stronger for concrete words than for abstract words.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>