Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0155339 (Brown)
 12,436 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

S. J. Lupker, P. Brown, and L. Colombo (1997) reported that target naming latencies are strongly affected by the difficulty of the other stimuli in a trial block, an effect they attributed to readers' strategic use of a time criterion to guide responding. In the present research, the authors asked whether there are also trial-by-trial ("sequential") effects by examining naming latency as a function of the difficulty of the preceding stimulus. In Experiment 1, both nonwords and high-frequency regular words were named more rapidly following a word than a nonword. Experiments 2, 3, and 4 were parallel experiments involving a variety of stimulus types (e.g., high- and low-frequency inconsistent words, easy and hard nonwords). In all cases, similar sequential effects were observed (i.e., all stimulus types had shorter latencies following an easier-to-name than a harder-to-name stimulus). In terms of the time-criterion account, criterion placement appears to be affected by the relative difficulty of the preceding stimulus in a way that is independent of stimulus type.
 ...
PMID:Sequential effects in naming: a time-criterion account. 1120 93

Phonological lexical access has been investigated by examining both a pseudohomophone (e.g., brane) base-word frequency effect and a pseudohomophone advantage over pronounceable nonwords (e.g., frane) in a single mixed block of naming trials. With a new set of pseudohomophones and non-words presented in a mixed block, we replicated the standard finding in the naming literature: no reliable base-word frequency effect, and apseudohomophone advantage. However, for this and two of three other sets of stimuli--those of McCann and Besner (1987), Seidenberg, Petersen, MacDonald, and Plaut (1996), and Herdman, LeFevre, and Greenham (1996), respectively--reliable effects of base-word frequency on pseudohomophone naming latency were found when pseudohomophones were presented in pure blocks prior to nonwords. Three of the four stimulus sets tested produced a pseudohomophone naming disadvantage when pseudohomophones were presented prior to nonwords. When nonwords were presented first, these effects were diminished. A strategy-based scaling account of the data is argued to provide a better explanation of the data than is the criterion-homogenization theory (Lupker, Brown, & Colombo, 1997).
 ...
PMID:Diagnostics of phonological lexical processing: pseudohomophone naming advantages, disadvantages, and base-word frequency effects. 1245 99

We report two naming experiments examining the effects of filler type on the size of regularity and frequency effects. Low-frequency exception words were used as one filler type in both experiments. Their effects were contrasted with the effects of nonword fillers (Experiment 1) and low-frequency regular word fillers (Experiment 2). In both experiments, the size of the regularity effect was unaffected by the filler type manipulation. In contrast, the frequency effect interacted with filler type such that relative to the low-frequency exception filler environment, the size of the frequency effect was reduced in the environment of low frequency regular word fillers, but not in the environment of nonword fillers. These results appear to be better explained in terms of Lupker, Brown, and Colombo's (1997) flexible time-criterion framework than in terms of a pathway control hypothesis (e.g., Zevin & Balota, 2000).
 ...
PMID:Effects of filler type in naming: change in time criterion or attentional control of pathways? 1266 58

K. Rastle and M. Coltheart (1999) demonstrated that both nonwords and low-frequency regular words are named more slowly when mixed with first-phoneme irregular word fillers (e.g., CHEF) than when mixed with third-phoneme irregular word fillers (e.g., GLOW). Those authors suggested that their effects were due to a strategic de-emphasis of the nonlexical route when first-phoneme irregular fillers were used. An alternative explanation is that these results simply reflect a more lax position of a time criterion (S. J. Lupker, P. Brown, & L. Colombo, 1997) in the first-phoneme irregular filler condition. We contrasted these 2 accounts in 4 experiments. In all experiments, target naming latencies were longer when the fillers were harder to name, regardless of whether the fillers were nonwords or exception words. These results strongly favor a time-criterion account of K. Rastle and M. Coltheart's effects.
 ...
PMID:Strategic effects in word naming: examining the route-emphasis versus time-criterion accounts. 1266 53

The authors report 3 naming experiments using J. D. Zevin and D. A. Balota's (2000) multiple prime manipulation. They used 2 sets of nonword primes (fast and slow) and low-frequency exception word primes to separate the effects of prime speed from those of prime type. The size of the regularity effect was unaffected by prime type. Relative to the low-frequency exception word prime condition, the frequency effect was reduced in the fast, but not in the slow, nonword prime condition. Lexicality effect size was reduced in both nonword prime conditions, a result consistent with the lexical checking strategy described by S. J. Lupker, P. Brown, and L. Colombo (1997). The authors suggest that these results are better explained in terms of S. J. Lupker et al.'s time-criterion account than J. D. Zevin and D. A. Balota's pathway control hypothesis.
 ...
PMID:Priming and attentional control of lexical and sublexical pathways in naming: a reevaluation. 1277 51

When easy and difficult items are mixed together, their reading aloud latencies become more homogeneous relative to their presentation in unmixed ("pure") conditions (Lupker, Brown, & Colombo, 1997). We report two experiments designed to investigate the nature of the mechanism that underlies this list composition, or blocking, effect. In Experiment 1, we replicated Lupker et al.'s (1997) blocking effect in the reading aloud task and extended these findings to the visual lexical decision task. In Experiment 2, we found that blocking effects generalized across tasks: The characteristics of stimuli in a visual lexical decision task influenced reading aloud latencies, and vice versa, when visual lexical decision and reading aloud trials were presented alternately in the same experiment. We discuss implications of these results within time-criterion (Lupker et al., 1997) and strength-of-processing (Kello & Plaut, 2000, 2003) theories of strategic processing in reading.
 ...
PMID:Cross-task strategic effects. 1465 Dec 95

Taylor and Lupker (2001) reported that in a naming task, stimuli were named more rapidly when preceded by an easy-to-name stimulus than when preceded by a difficult-to-name stimulus (sequential effects). The goal of the present research was to investigate whether sequential effects could be explained in terms of time perception processes (within the context of Lupker, Brown, and Colombo's [1997] time criterion account). Participants were required to name easy and difficult stimuli (high-frequency words and nonwords in Experiment 1; words only in Experiment 2). Each naming trial was followed by a set of asterisks (*****). The participants were required to press a button when they thought the asterisks had been presented for exactly 1 sec. Time intervals produced after naming difficult stimuli were longer than time intervals produced after naming easy stimuli. That is, time perception was affected by the difficulty of word/nonword naming in a way that carried over to the next stimulus, supporting the idea that carryover effects in time perception may be the source of sequential effects in the naming task.
 ...
PMID:Sequential effects in time perception. 1754 33

We tested the list homogeneity effect in reading aloud (e.g., Lupker, Brown, & Colombo, 1997) using a megastudy paradigm. In each of two conditions, we used 25 blocks of 100 trials. In the random condition, words were selected randomly for each block, whereas in the experimental condition, words were blocked by difficulty (e.g., easy words together, etc.), but the order of the blocks was randomized. We predicted that standard factors (e.g., frequency) would be more predictive of reaction times (RTs) in the blocked than in the random condition, because the range of RTs across the experiment would increase in the blocked condition. Indeed, we found that the standard deviations and ranges of RTs were larger in the blocked than in the random condition. In addition, an examination of items at the difficulty extremes (i.e., very easy vs. very difficult) demonstrated a response bias. In regression analyses, a predictor set of seven sublexical, lexical, and semantic variables accounted for 2.8% more RT variance (and 2.6% more zRT variance) in the blocked than in the random condition. These results indicate that response deadlines apply to megastudies of reading aloud, and that the influence of predictors may be underestimated in megastudies when item presentation is randomized. In addition, the CDP++ model accounted for 0.8% more variance in RTs (1.2% in zRTs) in the blocked than in the random condition. Thus, computational models may have more predictive power on item sets blocked by difficulty than on those presented in random order. The results also indicate that models of word processing need to accommodate response criterion shifts.
 ...
PMID:Participants shift response deadlines based on list difficulty during reading-aloud megastudies. 2821 Oct 25