Masked priming for prefixed words with bound stems: Does submit prime permit?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

50 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Masked priming effects for prefixed words sharing a bound stem (e.g., submit-PERMIT) are compared with priming effects for semantically transparent prefixed words (e.g., fold-UNFOLD). In three experiments, priming effects were obtained for both types with no significant difference between them. These results suggest that semantic transparency is not critical for priming in this paradigm. However, in Experiment 2, priming in the bound stem condition did not differ significantly from an orthographic control condition (e.g., shallow-FOLLOW). In Experiment 3, form priming effects were suppressed by the use of close distractors and a longer prime duration. The morphological effects remained unaltered, indicating that they were not a product of orthographic overlap. The magnitude of bound stem priming was also found to be related to productivity of the stem.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)539-561
Number of pages23
JournalLanguage and Cognitive Processes
Volume15
Issue number4-5
StatePublished - 2000

Fingerprint

Licensure
Semantics
experiment
transparency
productivity
semantics
Bound Stem
Priming
Masked Priming
paradigm
Experiment
Orthographic

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Linguistics and Language
  • Neuroscience(all)
  • Psychology(all)
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Cite this

Masked priming for prefixed words with bound stems : Does submit prime permit? / Forster, Kenneth I; Azuma, T.

In: Language and Cognitive Processes, Vol. 15, No. 4-5, 2000, p. 539-561.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ee1fa2d2a52b4dacb4b598d1011fff09,
title = "Masked priming for prefixed words with bound stems: Does submit prime permit?",
abstract = "Masked priming effects for prefixed words sharing a bound stem (e.g., submit-PERMIT) are compared with priming effects for semantically transparent prefixed words (e.g., fold-UNFOLD). In three experiments, priming effects were obtained for both types with no significant difference between them. These results suggest that semantic transparency is not critical for priming in this paradigm. However, in Experiment 2, priming in the bound stem condition did not differ significantly from an orthographic control condition (e.g., shallow-FOLLOW). In Experiment 3, form priming effects were suppressed by the use of close distractors and a longer prime duration. The morphological effects remained unaltered, indicating that they were not a product of orthographic overlap. The magnitude of bound stem priming was also found to be related to productivity of the stem.",
author = "Forster, {Kenneth I} and T. Azuma",
year = "2000",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "15",
pages = "539--561",
journal = "Language, Cognition and Neuroscience",
issn = "2327-3798",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis",
number = "4-5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Masked priming for prefixed words with bound stems

T2 - Does submit prime permit?

AU - Forster, Kenneth I

AU - Azuma, T.

PY - 2000

Y1 - 2000

N2 - Masked priming effects for prefixed words sharing a bound stem (e.g., submit-PERMIT) are compared with priming effects for semantically transparent prefixed words (e.g., fold-UNFOLD). In three experiments, priming effects were obtained for both types with no significant difference between them. These results suggest that semantic transparency is not critical for priming in this paradigm. However, in Experiment 2, priming in the bound stem condition did not differ significantly from an orthographic control condition (e.g., shallow-FOLLOW). In Experiment 3, form priming effects were suppressed by the use of close distractors and a longer prime duration. The morphological effects remained unaltered, indicating that they were not a product of orthographic overlap. The magnitude of bound stem priming was also found to be related to productivity of the stem.

AB - Masked priming effects for prefixed words sharing a bound stem (e.g., submit-PERMIT) are compared with priming effects for semantically transparent prefixed words (e.g., fold-UNFOLD). In three experiments, priming effects were obtained for both types with no significant difference between them. These results suggest that semantic transparency is not critical for priming in this paradigm. However, in Experiment 2, priming in the bound stem condition did not differ significantly from an orthographic control condition (e.g., shallow-FOLLOW). In Experiment 3, form priming effects were suppressed by the use of close distractors and a longer prime duration. The morphological effects remained unaltered, indicating that they were not a product of orthographic overlap. The magnitude of bound stem priming was also found to be related to productivity of the stem.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033816356&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033816356&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0033816356

VL - 15

SP - 539

EP - 561

JO - Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

JF - Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

SN - 2327-3798

IS - 4-5

ER -