The prime lexicality effect: Form-priming as a function of prime awareness, lexical status, and discrimination difficulty

Kenneth I Forster, Csaba Veres

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

87 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

G. W. Humphreys, D. Besner, and P. T. Quinlan (1988) found that form-primes (e.g., contrast-CONTRACT) were effective only with masked primes. C. Veres (1986) obtained the same effect for word primes but found that nonword primes (e.g., contract) were effective regardless of masking. In a lexical-decision task, the present study failed to find any priming with word primes but only when the nonword distractors were very close to a particular word (e.g., UNIVORSE). With more distant nonword distractors (e.g., ANIVORSE), priming with word primes was restored in the masked condition. In terms of an entry-opening model of priming, this effect was interpreted as a blocking of priming by a postaccess checking operation. Alternatively, in an interactive activation model, this effect could be modeled either by decreasing the strength of lexical competition or by changing the decision criterion from local to global activation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)498-514
Number of pages17
JournalJournal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
Volume24
Issue number2
StatePublished - Mar 1998

Fingerprint

Contracts
discrimination
activation
Lexicality
Discrimination
Priming
Form Priming
Nonwords
Distractor

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

@article{bacfb6d6d2b345a6bc80f786181caac3,
title = "The prime lexicality effect: Form-priming as a function of prime awareness, lexical status, and discrimination difficulty",
abstract = "G. W. Humphreys, D. Besner, and P. T. Quinlan (1988) found that form-primes (e.g., contrast-CONTRACT) were effective only with masked primes. C. Veres (1986) obtained the same effect for word primes but found that nonword primes (e.g., contract) were effective regardless of masking. In a lexical-decision task, the present study failed to find any priming with word primes but only when the nonword distractors were very close to a particular word (e.g., UNIVORSE). With more distant nonword distractors (e.g., ANIVORSE), priming with word primes was restored in the masked condition. In terms of an entry-opening model of priming, this effect was interpreted as a blocking of priming by a postaccess checking operation. Alternatively, in an interactive activation model, this effect could be modeled either by decreasing the strength of lexical competition or by changing the decision criterion from local to global activation.",
author = "Forster, {Kenneth I} and Csaba Veres",
year = "1998",
month = "3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "498--514",
journal = "Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition",
issn = "0278-7393",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The prime lexicality effect

T2 - Form-priming as a function of prime awareness, lexical status, and discrimination difficulty

AU - Forster, Kenneth I

AU - Veres, Csaba

PY - 1998/3

Y1 - 1998/3

N2 - G. W. Humphreys, D. Besner, and P. T. Quinlan (1988) found that form-primes (e.g., contrast-CONTRACT) were effective only with masked primes. C. Veres (1986) obtained the same effect for word primes but found that nonword primes (e.g., contract) were effective regardless of masking. In a lexical-decision task, the present study failed to find any priming with word primes but only when the nonword distractors were very close to a particular word (e.g., UNIVORSE). With more distant nonword distractors (e.g., ANIVORSE), priming with word primes was restored in the masked condition. In terms of an entry-opening model of priming, this effect was interpreted as a blocking of priming by a postaccess checking operation. Alternatively, in an interactive activation model, this effect could be modeled either by decreasing the strength of lexical competition or by changing the decision criterion from local to global activation.

AB - G. W. Humphreys, D. Besner, and P. T. Quinlan (1988) found that form-primes (e.g., contrast-CONTRACT) were effective only with masked primes. C. Veres (1986) obtained the same effect for word primes but found that nonword primes (e.g., contract) were effective regardless of masking. In a lexical-decision task, the present study failed to find any priming with word primes but only when the nonword distractors were very close to a particular word (e.g., UNIVORSE). With more distant nonword distractors (e.g., ANIVORSE), priming with word primes was restored in the masked condition. In terms of an entry-opening model of priming, this effect was interpreted as a blocking of priming by a postaccess checking operation. Alternatively, in an interactive activation model, this effect could be modeled either by decreasing the strength of lexical competition or by changing the decision criterion from local to global activation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032013466&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032013466&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 9530846

AN - SCOPUS:0032013466

VL - 24

SP - 498

EP - 514

JO - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

JF - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

SN - 0278-7393

IS - 2

ER -