Cargando…

Automaticity revisited: when print doesn't activate semantics

It is widely accepted that the presentation of a printed word “automatically” triggers processing that ends with full semantic activation. This processing, among other characteristics, is held to occur without intention, and cannot be stopped. The results of the present experiment show that this acc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Labuschagne, Elsa M., Besner, Derek
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4322538/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25713553
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00117
_version_ 1782356402602246144
author Labuschagne, Elsa M.
Besner, Derek
author_facet Labuschagne, Elsa M.
Besner, Derek
author_sort Labuschagne, Elsa M.
collection PubMed
description It is widely accepted that the presentation of a printed word “automatically” triggers processing that ends with full semantic activation. This processing, among other characteristics, is held to occur without intention, and cannot be stopped. The results of the present experiment show that this account is problematic in the context of a variant of the Stroop paradigm. Subjects named the print color of words that were either neutral or semantically related to color. When the letters were all colored, all spatially cued, and the spaces between letters were filled with characters from the top of the keyboard (i.e., 4, #, 5, %, 6, and *), color naming yielded a semantically based Stroop effect and a semantically based negative priming effect. In contrast, the same items yielded neither a semantic Stroop effect nor a negative priming effect when a single target letter was uniquely colored and spatially cued. These findings (a) undermine the widespread view that lexical-semantic activation in word reading is automatic in the sense that it occurs without intention and cannot be derailed, and (b) strengthens the case that both implicit and explicit forms of visual word recognition require spatial attention as a necessary preliminary to lexical-semantic processing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4322538
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43225382015-02-24 Automaticity revisited: when print doesn't activate semantics Labuschagne, Elsa M. Besner, Derek Front Psychol Psychology It is widely accepted that the presentation of a printed word “automatically” triggers processing that ends with full semantic activation. This processing, among other characteristics, is held to occur without intention, and cannot be stopped. The results of the present experiment show that this account is problematic in the context of a variant of the Stroop paradigm. Subjects named the print color of words that were either neutral or semantically related to color. When the letters were all colored, all spatially cued, and the spaces between letters were filled with characters from the top of the keyboard (i.e., 4, #, 5, %, 6, and *), color naming yielded a semantically based Stroop effect and a semantically based negative priming effect. In contrast, the same items yielded neither a semantic Stroop effect nor a negative priming effect when a single target letter was uniquely colored and spatially cued. These findings (a) undermine the widespread view that lexical-semantic activation in word reading is automatic in the sense that it occurs without intention and cannot be derailed, and (b) strengthens the case that both implicit and explicit forms of visual word recognition require spatial attention as a necessary preliminary to lexical-semantic processing. Frontiers Media S.A. 2015-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4322538/ /pubmed/25713553 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00117 Text en Copyright © 2015 Labuschagne and Besner. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Labuschagne, Elsa M.
Besner, Derek
Automaticity revisited: when print doesn't activate semantics
title Automaticity revisited: when print doesn't activate semantics
title_full Automaticity revisited: when print doesn't activate semantics
title_fullStr Automaticity revisited: when print doesn't activate semantics
title_full_unstemmed Automaticity revisited: when print doesn't activate semantics
title_short Automaticity revisited: when print doesn't activate semantics
title_sort automaticity revisited: when print doesn't activate semantics
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4322538/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25713553
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00117
work_keys_str_mv AT labuschagneelsam automaticityrevisitedwhenprintdoesntactivatesemantics
AT besnerderek automaticityrevisitedwhenprintdoesntactivatesemantics