Using the speeded word fragment completion task to examine semantic priming

Heyman, Tom; Deyne, Simon De; Hutchison, Keith A.; Storms, Gerrit

doi:10.3758/s13428-014-0496-5

Cited by 9 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That is, concrete words are recognized faster than abstract words, but only when deeper semantic processing is required by the task (Schwanenflugel, 1991). Hence, if the speeded word fragment completion task indeed involves more elaborate processing, as was suggested by Heyman et al (2015), one would expect a stronger relation between judged concreteness and response times. Concreteness ratings were again obtained from Brysbaert et al (2014).…”

Section: Semantic Variablementioning

confidence: 91%

“…1 All of the actual items in Heyman et al (2015) and in the present study were in Dutch, but analogous examples in English are given as illustrations. 2 In the context of this article, we use the term Beffect^without necessarily implying a causal relation.…”

Section: Standard Lexical Variablesmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Instead, they found a U-shaped relation such that length had a facilitatory effect for words of three to five letters, had no effect for words of five to eight letters, and had an inhibitory effect for words of eight to 13 letters. Because of this quadratic pattern, we included quadratic length (based on standardized length values) as a variable in the present study.1 All of the actual items in Heyman et al (2015) and in the present study were in Dutch, but analogous examples in English are given as illustrations. 2 In the context of this article, we use the term Beffect^without necessarily implying a causal relation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, Heyman and colleagues (2015) identified some other advantages over the lexical decision task. Specifically, the task is more efficient than lexical decision because it requires no nonwords, and participants rate it as more engaging and easier than the lexical decision task (Heyman et al, 2015). Given the promising results and potential advantages, it would be fruitful to build a database of speeded word fragment completion responses.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…fragment completion task (Heyman, De Deyne, Hutchison, & Storms, 2015). Each trial in this task features a word from which one letter has been deleted (e.g., tom_to).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Filling the gaps: A speeded word fragment completion megastudy

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the speeded word fragment completion task, participants have to complete fragments such as tom_to as quickly and accurately as possible. Previous work has shown that this paradigm can successfully capture subtle priming effects (Heyman, De Deyne, Hutchison, & Storms Behavior Research Methods, 47, 580-606, 2015). In addition, it has several advantages over the widely used lexical decision task. That is, the speeded word fragment completion task is more efficient, more engaging, and easier. Given its potential, we conducted a study to gather speeded word fragment completion norms. The goal of this megastudy was twofold. On the one hand, it provides a rich database of over 8,000 stimuli, which can, for instance, be used in future research to equate stimuli on baseline response times. On the other hand, the aim was to gain insight into the underlying processes of the speeded word fragment completion task. To this end, item-level regression and mixed-effects analyses were performed on the response latencies using 23 predictor variables. Since all items were selected from the Dutch Lexicon Project (Keuleers, Diependaele, & Brysbaert Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 174, 2010), we ran the same analyses on lexical decision latencies to compare the two tasks. Overall, the results revealed many similarities, but also some remarkable differences, which are discussed. We propose that both tasks are complementary when examining visual word recognition. The article ends with a discussion of potential process models of the speeded word fragment completion task.Keywords Speeded word fragment completion task . Lexical decision task . Visual word recognitionIn the last decade, the field of visual word recognition has seen a surge in so-called megastudies (see Balota, Yap, Hutchison, & Cortese, 2012, for an overview). Generally speaking, a typical megastudy comprises several thousand items for which lexical decision, naming, and/or word identification responses are collected. The rationale behind megastudies is that they complement (traditional) factorial studies in which stimuli are selected on the basis of specific lexical or semantic characteristics. That is, factorial studies require one to experimentally control for a number of variables that could potentially obscure the effect(s) of interest. Megastudies, on the other hand, aim to gather data for as many stimuli as possible, without many constraints. The idea is that one can then statistically control for confounding variables by conducting a multiple regression analysis. In addition, continuous variables such as word frequency need not be divided into distinct categories (i.e., high-frequency vs. low-frequency words). This is a critical advantage of the megastudy approach, because artificially dichotomizing continuous variables has been shown to reduce power and increase the probability of Type I errors (Maxwell & Delaney, 1993).In the present study we sought to build on this work, and we describe a megastudy involving the speeded word Electronic supplementary ma...

show abstract

Section: Semantic Variablementioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Standard Lexical Variablesmentioning

confidence: 92%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…fragment completion task (Heyman, De Deyne, Hutchison, & Storms, 2015). Each trial in this task features a word from which one letter has been deleted (e.g., tom_to).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Filling the gaps: A speeded word fragment completion megastudy

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Is semantic priming (ir)rational? Insights from the speeded word fragment completion task.

Heyman¹,

Hutchison

Storms³

2016

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Semantic priming, the phenomenon that a target is recognized faster if it is preceded by a semantically related prime, is a well-established effect. However, the mechanisms producing semantic priming are subject of debate. Several theories assume that the underlying processes are controllable and tuned to prime utility. In contrast, purely automatic processes, like automatic spreading activation, should be independent of the prime's usefulness. The present study sought to disentangle both accounts by creating a situation where prime processing is actually detrimental. Specifically, participants were asked to quickly complete word fragments with either the letter a or e (e.g., sh_ve to be completed as shave). Critical fragments were preceded by a prime that was either related (e.g., push) or unrelated (write) to a prohibited completion of the target (e.g., shove). In 2 experiments, we found a significant inhibitory priming effect, which is inconsistent with purely "rational" explanations of semantic priming. (PsycINFO Database Record

show abstract

Retrieval activates related words more than presentation

Hausman

Rhodes

2018

Memory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Retrieving information enhances learning more than restudying. One explanation of this effect is based on the role of mediators (e.g., sand-castle can be mediated by beach). Retrieval is hypothesised to activate mediators more than restudying, but existing tests of this hypothesis have had mixed results [Carpenter, S. K. (2011). Semantic information activated during retrieval contributes to later retention: Support for the mediator effectiveness hypothesis of the testing effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(6), 1547-1552. doi: 10.1037/a0024140 ; Lehman, M., & Karpicke, J. D. (2016). Elaborative retrieval: Do semantic mediators improve memory? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(10), 1573-1591. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000267 ]. The present experiments explored an explanation of the conflicting results, testing whether mediator activation during a retrieval attempt depends on the accessibility of the target information. A target was considered less versus more accessible when fewer versus more cues were given during retrieval practice (Experiments 1 and 2), when the target had been studied once versus three times initially (Experiment 3), or when the target could not be recalled versus could be recalled during retrieval practice (Experiments 1-3). A mini meta-analysis of all three experiments revealed a small effect such that retrieval activated mediators more than presentation, but mediator activation was not reliably related to target accessibility. Thus, retrieval may enhance learning by activating mediators, in part, but these results suggest the role of other processes, too.

show abstract

Using the speeded word fragment completion task to examine semantic priming

Cited by 9 publications

References 32 publications

Filling the gaps: A speeded word fragment completion megastudy

Filling the gaps: A speeded word fragment completion megastudy

Is semantic priming (ir)rational? Insights from the speeded word fragment completion task.

Retrieval activates related words more than presentation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About