In:Bilingualism through the Prism of Psycholinguistics: In honour of Albert Costa
Edited by Mikel Santesteban, Jon Andoni Duñabeitia and Cristina Baus
[Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 17] 2023
► pp. 54–101
Chapter 2The what and when of word retrieval in spoken language
production
Published online: 1 September 2023
https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.17.02mah
https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.17.02mah
Abstract
Semantically driven lexical access in spoken
language production is the process of transposing a communicative
intention into phono-articulatory codes. At each stage of
processing, from lexical-semantic retrieval through to
phono-articulatory processing, more representations are active than
are minimally necessary to produce the target word. In recognition
of that fact, research over the past three decades has been driven
by a (putative) need to answer a core question: How is conflict
resolved at the lexical level? The ‘standard view’ involves some
form of the idea that selection of the target word is governed by a
stochastic process implemented via a biased competition mechanism,
with the nature of the ‘bias’ differing quite widely across
proposals. Here we argue that the standard view is out of synchrony
with a range of findings; interestingly, and as a matter of historical
precedent, a number of those findings pre-date the earliest
formulations of the standard view. Stepping back, we argue for a new
approach to framing the question of word retrieval: no mechanism is
needed to resolve conflict at the lexical level, because there is no
conflict at the lexical level. Selection occurs at
the semantic/message level. After selection of the intended meaning
representation, the next opportunity in the processing pathway to
re-evaluate which word to produce is at the level
of the pre-articulatory response monitor. We refer to this as a
‘ballistic’ model of word retrieval to emphasize there is no
uncertainty about the identity of the target
word at the lexical level, and that retrieval of
the correct representation at that level can be sped up, but not
slowed down.
Article outline
- Introduction
- Choice and timing in speech production
- Intra-trial manipulations
- Inter-trial manipulations
- Two debates about the dynamics of information access during word retrieval
- Post-lexical decision processes: Adjudicating among production-ready responses
- Semantic facilitation in word retrieval
- Manipulating semantic distance while holding response relevance
constant
- Summary of Intra-trial semantic effects in Stroop-like paradigms
- Inter-trial interference and facilitation in picture naming
- Looking back to see forward
Note References
References (142)
Abdel Rahman, R., & Melinger, A. (2007). When
bees hamper the production of honey: Lexical interference
from associates in speech
production. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 33(3), 604–614.
(2009a). Semantic
context effects in language production: A swinging lexical
network proposal and a
review. Language and
Cognitive
Processes, 24(5), 713–734.
(2009b). Dismissing
lexical competition does not make speaking any easier: A
rejoinder to Mahon and Caramazza
(2009). Language and
Cognitive
Processes, 24(5), 749–760.
(2011). The
dynamic microstructure of speech production: Semantic
interference built on the
fly. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 37(1), 149–161.
(2019). Semantic
processing during language production: an update of the
swinging lexical
network. Language, Cognition
and
Neuroscience, 34(9), 1176–1192.
Alario, F. X., & del Prado Martín, F. M. (2010). On
the origin of the “cumulative semantic inhibition”
effect. Memory &
Cognition, 38(1), 57–66.
Xavier Alario, F., Segui, J., & Ferrand, L. (2000). Semantic and associative priming in picture naming. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 53(3), 741–764.
Belke, E. (2013). Long-lasting
inhibitory semantic context effects on object naming are
necessarily conceptually mediated: Implications for models
of lexical-semantic
encoding. Journal of Memory
and
Language, 69(3), 228–256.
Belke, E., Brysbaert, M., Meyer, A. S., & Ghyselinck, M. (2005). Age
of acquisition effects in picture naming: Evidence for a
lexical-semantic competition
hypothesis. Cognition, 96(2), B45–B54.
Belke, E., Meyer, A. S., & Damian, M. F. (2005). Refractory
effects in picture naming as assessed in a semantic blocking
paradigm. The Quarterly
Journal of Experimental Psychology Section
A, 58(4), 667–692.
Belke, E., Shao, Z., & Meyer, A. S. (2017). Strategic
origins of early semantic facilitation in the blocked-cyclic
naming paradigm. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 43(10), 1659–1668.
Belke, E., & Stielow, A. (2013). Cumulative
and non-cumulative semantic interference in object naming:
Evidence from blocked and continuous manipulations of
semantic context. The
Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 66(11), 2135–2160.
Biggs, T., & Marmurek, H. (1990). Picture
and word naming: Is facilitation due to processing
overlap? American Journal of
Psychology, 103, 81–100.
Blanco-Elorrieta, E., & Caramazza, A. (2021). A
common selection mechanism at each linguistic level in
bilingual and monolingual language
production. Cognition, 213, 104625.
Bloem, I., & La Heij, W. (2003). Semantic
facilitation and semantic interference in word translation:
Implications for models of lexical access in language
production. Journal of Memory
and
Language, 48(3), 468–488.
Bloem, I., van den Boogaard, S., & La Heij, W. (2004). Semantic
facilitation and semantic interference in language
production: Further evidence for the conceptual selection
model of lexical
access. Journal of Memory and
Language, 51(2), 307–323.
Brown, A. S. (1981). Inhibition
in cued retrieval. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and
Memory, 7, 204–215.
Brysbaert, M., Stevens, M., Mandera, P., & Keuleers, E. (2016). How
many words do we know? Practical estimates of vocabulary
size dependent on word definition, the degree of language
input and the participant’s
age. Frontiers in
Psychology, 7, 1116.
Bürki, A., Elbuy, S., Madec, S., & Vasishth, S. (2020). What
did we learn from forty years of research on semantic
interference? A Bayesian
meta-analysis. Journal of
Memory and
Language, 114, 104125.
Caramazza, A. (1997). How
many levels of processing are there in lexical
access? Cognitive
Neuropsychology, 14(1), 177–208.
Caramazza, A., & Costa, A. (2000). The
semantic interference effect in the picture-word
interference paradigm: does the response set
matter? Cognition, 75(2), B51–B64.
(2001). Set
size and repetition in the picture–word interference
paradigm: Implications for models of
naming. Cognition, 80(3), 291–298.
Caramazza, A., Costa, A., Miozzo, M., & Bi, Y. (2001). The
specific-word frequency effect: Implications for the
representation of homophones in speech
production. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 27(6), 1430–1450.
Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A
spreading-activation theory of semantic
processing. Psychological
Review, 82(6), 407.
(2021). The
bilingual brain: And what it tells us about the science of
language (J. W. Schwieter, Trans.). Penguin. (Original
work published in 2017)
Costa, A., Alario, F.-X., & Caramazza, A. (2005). On
the categorical nature of the semantic interference effect
in the picture-word interference
paradigm. Psychonomic
Bulletin and
Review, 12, 125–131.
Costa, A., Caramazza, A., & Sebastian-Galles, N. (2000). The
cognate facilitation effect: implications for models of
lexical access. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 26(5), 1283–1296.
Costa, A., Mahon, B., Savova, V., & Caramazza, A. (2003). Level
of categorization effect: A novel effect in the picture-word
interference
paradigm. Language and
Cognitive
Processes, 18, 205–233.
Costa, A., Miozzo, M., & Caramazza, A. (1999). Lexical
selection in bilinguals: Do words in the bilingual’s two
lexicons compete for
selection? Journal of Memory
and
Language, 41(3), 365–397.
Costa, A., Pannunzi, M., Deco, G., & Pickering, M. J. (2017). Do
bilinguals automatically activate their native language when
they are not using
it. Cognitive
science, 41(6), 1629–1644.
Costa, A., Strijkers, K., Martin, C., & Thierry, G. (2009). The
time course of word retrieval revealed by event-related
brain potentials during overt
speech. Proceedings of the
National Academy of
Sciences, 106(50), 21442–21446.
Damian, M. F., & Als, L. C. (2005). Long-lasting
semantic context effects in the spoken production of object
names. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 31(6), 1372–1384.
Damian, M. F., & Bowers, J. S. (2003). Locus
of semantic interference in picture-word interference
tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin
&
Review, 10(1), 111–117.
Damian, M. F., Vigliocco, G., & Levelt, W. J. (2001). Effects
of semantic context in the naming of pictures and
words. Cognition, 81(3), B77–B86.
Damian, M. F., & Spalek, K. (2014). Processing
different kinds of semantic relations in picture-word
interference with nonmasked and masked
distractors. Frontiers in
Psychology, 5, 1183.
Dalrymple-Alford, E. C. (1972). Associative
facilitation and interference in the Stroop color-word
task. Perception and
Psychophysics, 11(4), 274–276.
Dean, M. P., Bub, D. N., & Masson, M. E. (2001). Interference
from related items in object
identification. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 27(3), 733–743.
Dehaene, S., Naccache, L., Le Clec’H, G., Koechlin, E., Mueller, M., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., van de Moortele, P.-F., & Le Bihan, D. (1998). Imaging
unconscious semantic
priming. Nature, 395(6702), Article
6702.
Dell, G. S. (1986). A
spreading activation theory of retrieval in sentence
production. Psychological
Review, 93, 283–321.
(1988). The
retrieval of phonological forms in production: Test of
predictions from a connectionist
model. Journal of Memory and
Language, 27, 124–142.
Dell, G. S., Oppenheim, G. M., & Kittredge, A. K. (2008). Saying
the right word at the right time: Syntagmatic and
paradigmatic interference in sentence
production. Language and
Cognitive
Processes, 23(4), 583–608.
Dell, G. S., & O’Seaghdha, P. G. (1992). Stages
of lexical access in language
production. Cognition, 42(1), 287–314.
Dhooge, E., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2010). The
distractor frequency effect in picture-word interference:
Evidence for response
exclusion. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 36, 878–891.
(2011a). How
do speakers resist distraction? Evidence from a taboo
picture-word interference
task. Psychological
Science, 22, 855–859.
(2011b). The
distractor frequency effect in a delayed picture- word
interference task: Further evidence for response
exclusion. Psychonomic
Bulletin &
Review, 18, 116–122.
(2012). Lexical
selection and verbal self-monitoring: Effects of lexicality,
context, and time pressure in picture-word
interference. Journal of
Memory and
Cognition, 1, 163–176.
Dylman, A. S., & Barry, C. (2018). When
having two names facilitates lexical selection: Similar
results in the picture-word task from translation
distractors in bilinguals and synonym distractors in
monolinguals. Cognition, 171, 151–171.
Finkbeiner, M., & Caramazza, A. (2006). Now
you see it, now you don’t: On turning semantic interference
into facilitation in a Stroop-like
task. Cortex, 42, 790–796.
Fox, L. A., Shor, R. E., & Steinman, R. J. (1971). Semantic
gradients and interference in naming color, spatial
direction, and
numerosity. Journal of
Experimental
Psychology, 91(1), 59–65.
Garrett, M. F. (1975). The
analysis of sentence
production. In G. Bower (Ed.), The
psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research
and
theory (Vol. 9). Academic Press.
(1980). Levels
of processing in sentence
production. In B. Butterworth (Ed.), Language
production. Vol. 1: Speech and
talk. Academic Press.
Goldrick, M., & Rapp, B. (2002). A
restricted interaction account (RIA) of spoken word
production: The best of both
worlds. Aphasiology, 16, 20–55.
Hantsch, A., Jescheniak, J. D., & Schriefers, H. (2009). Distractor
modality can turn semantic interference into semantic
facilitation in the picture–word interference task:
Implications for theories of lexical access in speech
production. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 35(6), 1443–1453.
Hantsch, A., & Mädebach, A. (2013). What
does the articulatory output buffer know about alternative
picture names? Evidence against the response-exclusion
hypothesis. Language and
Cognitive
Processes, 28(5), 684–700.
Harley, T. A. (1984). A
critique of top-down independent levels of speech
production. Evidence from non-plan-internal speech
errors. Cognitive
Science, 8, 191–219.
Hartsuiker, R. J., & Kolk, H. H. (2001). Error
monitoring in speech production: A computational test of the
perceptual loop
theory. Cognitive
Psychology, 42(2), 113–157.
Hartsuiker, R. J., Pickering, M. J., & de Jong, N. H. (2005). Semantic
and phonological context effects in speech error
repair. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 5, 921–932.
Hirschfeld, G., Jansma, B., Bölte, J., & Zwitserlood, P. (2008). Interference and facilitation in overt speech production investigated with event-related potentials. Neuroreport, 19(12), 1227–1230.
Howard, D., Nickels, L., Coltheart, M., & Cole-Virtue, J. (2006). Cumulative
semantic inhibition in picture naming: Experimental and
computational
studies. Cognition, 100, 464–482.
Humphreys, G. W., Riddoch, M. J., & Quinlan, P. T. (1988). Cascade
processes in picture
identification. Cognitive
Neuropsychology, 5, 67–103.
Humphreys, G. W., Lloyd-Jones, T. J., & Fias, W. (1995). Semantic
interference effects on naming using a postcue procedure:
Tapping the links between semantics and phonology with
pictures and words. Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 21(4), 961–980.
Huttenlocher, J., & Kubicek, L. F. (1983). The
source of relatedness effects on naming
latency. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 9, 486–496.
Ischebeck, A. (2003). Differences
between digit naming and number word reading in a flanker
task. Memory and
Cognition, 31, 529–537.
Jescheniak, J. D., Matushanskaya, A., Mädebach, A., & Müller, M. M. (2014). Semantic
interference from distractor pictures in single-picture
naming: Evidence for competitive lexical
selection. Psychonomic
Bulletin &
Review, 21(5), 1294–1300.
Jescheniak, J. D., Meyer, A., & Levelt, W. J. M. (2003). Specific-word
frequency is not all that counts in speech production.
Evidence from the production of homophones in Dutch and
German. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 29, 432–438.
Klein, G. S. (1964). Semantic
power measured through the interference of words with
color-naming. The American
Journal of
Psychology, 77, 576–588.
Kroll, J. F., & Stewart, E. (1994). Category
interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for
asymmetric connections between bilingual memory
representations. Journal of
Memory and
Language, 33(2), 149–174.
Kuipers, J. R., La Heij, W., & Costa, A. (2006). A
further look at semantic context effects in language
production: The role of response
congruency. Language and
Cognitive
Processes, 21(7–8), 892–919.
Kuipers, J. R., & La Heij, W. (2008). Semantic
facilitation in category and action naming: Testing the
message-congruency
account. Journal of Memory
and
Language, 58(1), 123–139.
(2012). Congruency
effects in conceptualizing for
speech. Quarterly Journal of
Experimental
Psychology, 65(11), 2155–2168.
La Heij, W. (1988). Components
of Stroop-like interference in picture
naming. Memory &
Cognition, 16(5), 400–410.
(2005). Selection
processes in monolingual and bilingual lexical
access. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook
of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic
approaches (pp. 289–307). Oxford University Press.
La Heij, W., Heikoop, K. W., Akerboom, S., & Bloem, I. (2003). Picture
naming in picture context: Semantic interference or semantic
facilitation? Psychology
Science, 45(1), 49–62.
Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A
theory of lexical access in speech
production. Behavioral and
Brain
Sciences, 22(1), 1–38.
Levelt, W. J. M., Schriefers, H., Vorberg, D., Meyer, A. S., Pechmann, T., & Havinga, J. (1991). The
time course of lexical access in speech production: A study
of picture
naming. Psychological
Review, 98(1), 122–142.
Lupker, S. J. (1979). The
semantic nature of response competition in the picture-word
interference task. Memory
&
Cognition, 7(6), 485–495.
(1982). The
role of phonetic and orthographic similarity in picture–word
interference. Canadian
Journal of Psychology/Revue Canadienne de
Psychologie, 36(3), 349–367.
(1988). Picture
naming: An investigation of the nature of categorical
priming. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 14, 444–455.
Lupker, S. J., & Katz, A. N. (1981). Input,
decision, and response factors in picture–word
interference. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and
Memory, 7(4), 269–282.
MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half
a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative
review. Psychological
Bulletin, 109(2), 163–203.
Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2009). Why
does lexical selection have to be so hard? Comment on Abdel
Rahman and Melinger’s swinging lexical network
proposal. Language and
Cognitive
Processes, 24(5), 735–748.
Mahon, B. Z., Costa, A., Peterson, R., Vargas, K. A., & Caramazza, A. (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
Cognition, 33(3), 503–535.
Mahon, B. Z., & Navarrete, E. (2014). The
critical difference in models of speech production: A
response to Roelofs and
Piai. Cortex, 52, 123–127.
(2016). Modelling
lexical access in speech production as a ballistic
process. Language, Cognition
and
Neuroscience, 31(4), 521–523.
(2019). Adjudicating
conflict in speech production – Do we need a central
selection
mechanism? Cognitive
Neuropsychology, 36(5–6), 220–224.
Mahon, B. Z., Garcea, F. E., & Navarrete, E. (2012). Picture-word
interference and the response- exclusion hypothesis: A
response to Mulatti and
Coltheart. Cortex, 48(3), 373–377.
Matushanskaya, A., Mädebach, A., Müller, M. M., & Jescheniak, J. D. (2017). When
sufficiently processed, semantically related distractor
pictures hamper picture
naming. Experimental
Psychology, 63(3), 307–317.
Meyer, A. S., & Damian, M. F. (2007). Activation
of distractor names in the picture-picture interference
paradigm. Memory &
Cognition, 35(3), 494–503.
Miozzo, M., & Caramazza, A. (2003). When
more is less: A counterintuitive effect of distractor
frequency in the picture-word interference
paradigm. Journal of
Experimental Psychology:
General, 132, 228–252.
Morsella, E., & Miozzo, M. (2002). Evidence
for a cascade model of lexical access in speech
production. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 28(3), 555–563.
Muehlhaus, J., Heim, S., Sachs, O., Schneider, F., Habel, U., & Sass, K. (2013). Is
the motor or the garage more important to the car? The
difference between semantic associations in single word and
sentence production. Journal
of Psycholinguistic
Research, 42(1), 37–49.
Navarrete, E., Benavides-Varela, S., Lorusso, R., & Arfè, B. (2021). Cumulative
semantic cost without successful
naming. Memory &
Cognition, 49(7), 1348–1359.
Navarrete, E., Caccaro, A., Pavani, F., Mahon, B. Z., & Peressotti, F. (2015). With
or without semantic mediation: Retrieval of lexical
representations in sign
production. Journal of Deaf
Studies and Deaf
Education, 20(2), 163–171.
Navarrete, E., & Costa, A. (2005). Phonological
activation of ignored pictures: Further evidence for a
cascade model of lexical
access. Journal of Memory and
Language, 53(3), 359–377.
(2009). The
distractor picture paradox in speech production: Evidence
from the word translation
task. Journal of
Psycholinguistic
Research, 38(6), 527–547.
Navarrete, E., Del Prato, P., & Mahon, B. Z. (2012). Factors
determining semantic facilitation and interference in the
cyclic naming
paradigm. Frontiers in
Psychology, 3, 38.
Navarrete, E., Del Prato, P., Peressotti, F., & Mahon, B. Z. (2014). Lexical
selection is not by competition: Evidence from the blocked
naming paradigm. Journal of
Memory and
Language, 76, 253–272.
Navarrete, E., & Mahon, B. Z. (2013). A
rose by any other name is still a rose: A reinterpretation
of Hantsch and
Mädebach. Language and
Cognitive
Processes, 28(5), 701–716.
Navarrete, E., Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2010). The
cumulative semantic cost does not reflect lexical selection
by competition. Acta
Psychologica, 134, 279–289.
Nozari, N., Dell, G. S., & Schwartz, M. F. (2011). Is
comprehension necessary for error detection? A
conflict-based account of monitoring in speech
production. Cognitive
Psychology, 63(1), 1–33.
Nozari, N., & Hepner, C. R. (2019). To
select or to wait? The importance of criterion setting in
debates of competitive lexical
selection. Cognitive
Neuropsychology, 36(5–6), 193–207.
Oppenheim, G. (2017). Strong
competitors facilitate target name retrieval in simple
picture naming. Abstract
from Architectures and Mechanisms
in Language Processing
2017, Lancaster, United Kingdom.
Oppenheim, G. M., Dell, G. S., & Schwartz, M. F. (2010). The
dark side of incremental learning: A model of cumulative
semantic interference during lexical access in speech
production. Cognition, 114(2), 227–252.
Peterson, R. R., & Savoy, P. (1998). Lexical
selection and phonological encoding during language
production: Evidence for cascaded
processing. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 24(3), 539–557.
Piai, V., Roelofs, A., & Schriefers, H. (2012). Distractor
strength and selective attention in picture-naming
performance. Memory &
Cognition, 40(4), 614–627.
Rapp, B., & Goldrick, M. (2000). Discreteness
and interactivity in spoken word
production. Psychological
Review, 107, 460–499.
Redmann, A., FitzPatrick, I., & Indefrey, P. (2019). The
time course of colour congruency effects in picture
naming. Acta
Psychologica, 196, 96–108.
Roelofs, A. (1992). A
spreading-activation theory of lemma retrieval in
speaking. Cognition, 42, 107–142.
(2003). Goal-referenced
selection of verbal action: modeling attentional control in
the Stroop
task. Psychological
Review, 110(1), 88–125.
(2018). A
unified computational account of cumulative semantic,
semantic blocking, and semantic distractor effects in
picture
naming. Cognition, 172, 59–72.
Roelofs, A., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1996). Interaction
between semantic and orthographic factors in conceptually
driven naming: Comment on Starreveld and La Heij
(1995). Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 22, 246–251.
Roelofs, A., & Piai, V. (2013). Associative
facilitation in the Stroop task: Comment on Mahon et al.
(2012). Cortex, 49(6), 1767–1769.
Rose, S. B., Aristei, S., Melinger, A., & Abdel Rahman, R. (2019). The
closer they are, the more they interfere: Semantic
similarity of word distractors increases competition in
language production. Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 45(4), 753–763.
Rosinski, R. R., Golinkoff, R. M., & Kukish, K. S. (1975). Automatic
semantic processing in the picture-word interference
task. Child
Development, 46, 247–253. [URL]
Runnqvist, E., Strijkers, K., Alario, F. X., & Costa, A. (2012). Cumulative
semantic interference is blind to language: Implications for
models of bilingual speech
production. Journal of Memory
and
Language, 66, 350–869.
Sailor, K., Brooks, P. J., Bruening, P. R., Seiger-Gardner, L., & Guterman, M. (2009). Exploring
the time course of semantic interference and associative
priming in the picture–word interference
task. Quarterly Journal of
Experimental
Psychology, 62(4), 789–801.
Sailor, K., & Brooks, P. J. (2014). Do
part–whole relations produce facilitation in the picture–
word interference
task? Quarterly Journal of
Experimental
Psychology, 67(9), 1768–1785.
Santesteban, M., Costa, A., Pontin, S., & Navarrete, E. (2006). The
effect of word-frequency on lexical selection in speech
production: Evidence from semantic homogeneous naming
contexts. Cognitiva, 18(1), 75–84.
Scaltritti, M., Peressotti, F., & Navarrete, E. (2017). A
joint investigation of semantic facilitation and semantic
interference in continuous
naming. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 43(5), 818–823.
Schnur, T. T. (2014). The
persistence of cumulative semantic interference during
naming. Journal of Memory and
Language, 75, 27–44.
Schriefers, H., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1990). Exploring
the time course of lexical access in language production:
Picture-word interference
studies. Journal of Memory
and
Language, 29, 86–102.
Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (1987). The
role of word onset consonants in speech production planning:
New evidence from speech error
patterns. In E. Keller & M. Gopnik (Eds.), Sensory
processes in
language. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Simon, J. R., & Sudalaimuthu, P. (1979). Effects
of S-R mapping and response modality on performance in a
Stroop Task. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance, 5, 176–187.
Sperber, R. D., McCauley, C., Ragain, R. D., & Weil, C. M. (1979). Semantic
priming effects on picture and word
processing. Memory &
Cognition, 7, 339–345.
Starreveld, P. A., & La Heij, W. (1995). Semantic
interference, orthographic facilitation and their
interaction in naming
tasks. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 21, 686–698.
(1996). Time-course
analysis of semantic and orthographic context effects in
picture naming. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 22, 896–918.
Stemberger, J. P. (1985). An
interactive activation model of language
production. In A. W. Ellis (Ed.), Progress
in the psychology of
language (Vol. 1). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sternberg, S. (1969). The
discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders’
method. Attention and
performance II, W. G. Koster (Ed.). Acta
Psychologica, 30, 276–315.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies
of interference in serial verbal
reactions. Journal of
Experimental
Psychology, 18(6), 643–662.
Vieth, H. E., McMahon, K. L., & de Zubicaray, G. I. (2014). Feature
overlap slows lexical selection: Evidence from the
picture–word interference
paradigm. Quarterly Journal
of Experimental
Psychology, 67(12), 2325–2339.
Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Lewis, W., & Garrett, M. F. (2004). Representing the meanings of object and action words: The featural and unitary semantic space hypothesis. Cognitive Psychology, 48, 422–488.
Vitkovitch, M. (1996). Patterns
of excitation and inhibition in picture
naming. Visual
Cognition, 3(1), 61–80.
Vitkovitch, M., & Tyrrell, L. (1999). The
effects of distractor words on naming pictures at the
subordinate level. The
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section
A, 52(4), 905–926.
Vitkovitch, M., & Rutter, C. (2000). The
effects of response stimuli interval on error priming in
sequential object
naming. Visual
Cognition, 7(5), 645–670.