The picture–word interference (PWI) task is a widely used technique for exploring effects of semantic context on lexical access. In this task, printed words are superimposed over pictures to be named, with the timing of the interfering word relative to the picture systematically manipulated. Two experiments (N = 24 adults in each) explored the time course of effects of associates (e.g., CARROT superimposed on a picture of a rabbit) versus coordinates (e.g., CHIPMUNK superimposed on a picture of a rabbit) on naming latencies. Associates led to faster picture naming than did unrelated words, with facilitative effects occurring at stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs, in ms) ranging from –450 to 0. Coordinates led to slower naming latencies, with the interference effect restricted to SOAs of –150 and 0. The overlapping time course of associative priming and coordinate interference provides important constraints on models of lexical access in speech production.
AlarioF.-X.SeguiJ.FerrandL. (2000). Semantic and associative priming in picture naming.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology53A, 741–764.
2.
BajoM.-T. (1988). Semantic facilitation with pictures and words.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition14, 579–589.
3.
BloemI.La HeijW. (2003). Semantic facilitation and semantic interference in word translation: Implications for models of lexical access in language production.Journal of Memory and Language48, 468–488.
4.
BloemI.van den BoogaardS.La HeijW. (2004). Semantic facilitation and semantic interference in language production: Further evidence for the conceptual selection model of lexical access.Journal of Memory and Language51, 307–323.
5.
CaramazzaA. (1997). How many levels of processing are there in lexical access?.Cognitive Neuropsychology14, 177–208.
6.
CaramazzaA.CostaA. (2000). The semantic interference effect in the picture–word interference paradigm: Does the response set matter?.Cognition75, B51–B64.
7.
CaramazzaA.CostaA. (2001). Set size and repetition in the picture–word interference paradigm: Implications for models of naming.Cognition80, 291–298.
8.
CostaA.AlarioF.-X.CaramazzaA. (2005). On the categorical nature of the semantic interference effect in the picture–word interference paradigm.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review12, 125–131.
9.
CuttingJ. C.FerreiraV. S. (1999). Semantic and phonological information flow in the production lexicon.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition25, 318–344.
10.
CycowiczY. M.FriedmanD.RothsteinM.SnodgrassJ. G. (1997). Picture naming by young children: Norms for name agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology65, 171–237.
11.
DamianM. F.BowersJ. S. (2003). Locus of semantic interferences in picture–word interference tasks.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review10, 111–117.
12.
DamianM. F.MartinR. C. (1999). Semantic and phonological codes interact in single word production.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition25, 345–361.
13.
GlaserW. R.DüngelhoffF. J. (1984). The time course of picture–word interference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance10, 640–654.
14.
HanauerJ. B.BrooksP. J. (2005). Contributions of response set and semantic relatedness to cross-modal Stroop-like picture–word interference in children and adults.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology90, 21–47.
15.
JescheniakJ. D.HantschA.SchriefersH. (2005). Context effects on lexical choice and lexical activation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition31, 905–920.
16.
La HeijW.DirkxJ.KramerP. (1990). Categorical interference and associative priming in picture naming.British Journal of Psychology81, 511–525.
17.
LeveltW. J. M.RoelofsA.MeyerA. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production.Behavioral and Brain Sciences22, 1–75.
18.
LupkerS. J. (1979). The semantic nature of response competition in the picture–word interference task.Memory & Cognition7, 485–495.
19.
MahonB. Z.CostaA.PetersonR.VargasK. A.CaramazzaA. (2007). Lexical selection is not by competition: A reinterpretation of semantic interference and facilitation effects in the picture–word interference paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition33, 503–535.
20.
MiozzoM.CaramazzaA. (2003). When more is less: A counterintuitive effect of distractor frequency in picture–word interference paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General132, 228–252.
21.
NelsonD. L.McEvoyC. L.SchreiberT. A. (2004). The University of South Florida free association, rhyme, and word fragment norms.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers36, 402–407.
SchriefersH.MeyerA. S.LeveltW. J. M. (1990). Exploring the time course of lexical access in language production: Picture–word interference studies.Journal of Memory and Language29, 86–102.
24.
StarreveldP. A.La HeijW. (1996). Time-course analysis of semantic and orthographic context effects in picture naming.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition22, 896–918.
25.
UnderwoodG. (1976). Semantic interference from unattended printed words.British Journal of Psychology67, 327–338.
