Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in
Menu
Find a journal Publish with us Track your research
Search
Cart
  1. Home
  2. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
  3. Article

The impact of feedback semantics in visual word recognition: Number-of-features effects in lexical decision and naming tasks

  • Brief Reports
  • Published: September 2002
  • Volume 9, pages 542–549, (2002)
  • Cite this article
Download PDF
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript
The impact of feedback semantics in visual word recognition: Number-of-features effects in lexical decision and naming tasks
Download PDF
  • Penny M. Pexman1,
  • Stephen J. Lupker2 &
  • Yasushi Hino3 
  • 2199 Accesses

  • 162 Citations

  • Explore all metrics

Abstract

The notion of feedback activation from semantics to both orthography and phonology has recently been used to explain a number of semantic effects in visual word recognition, including polysemy effects (Hino & Lupker, 1996; Pexman & Lupker, 1999) and synonym effects (Pecher, 2001). In the present research, we tested an account based on feedback activation by investigating a new semantic variable: number of features (NOF). Words with high NOF (e.g., LION) should activate richer semantic representations than do words with low NOF (e.g., LIME). As a result, the feedback activation from semantics to orthographic and phonological representations should be greater for high-NOF words, which should produce superior lexical decision task (LDT) and naming task performance. The predicted facilitory NOF effects were observed in both LDT and naming.

Article PDF

Download to read the full article text

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.
  • Cognition
  • Cognitive Science
  • Language Processing
  • Natural Language Processing (NLP)
  • Perception
  • Semantic Memory
Use our pre-submission checklist

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

References

  • Balota, D. A., Ferraro, R. F., &Connor, L. T. (1991). On the early influence of meaning in word recognition: A review of the literature. In P. J. Schwanenflugel (Ed.),The psychology of word meanings (pp. 187–221). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besner, D., &Joordens, S. (1995). Wrestling with ambiguity—Further reflections: Reply to Masson and Borowsky (1995) and Rueckl (1995).Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 515–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Besner, D., &Smith, M. C. (1992). Models of visual word recognition: When obscuring the stimulus yields a clearer view.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 468–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borowsky, R., &Besner, D. (1993). Visual word recognition: A multistage activation model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,19, 813–840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borowsky, R., &Masson, M. E. J. (1996). Semantic ambiguity effects in word identification.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,22, 63–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., &Provost, J. (1993). Psy-Scope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,25, 257–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cortese, M. J., Simpson, G. B., &Woolsey, S. (1997). Effects of association and imageability on phonological mapping.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,4, 226–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Groot, A. M. (1989). Representational aspects of word imageability and word frequency as assessed through word association.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 824–845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, P., &Van Orden, G. C. (1998). Pathway selection's utility for control of word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 1162–1187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottlob, L. R., Goldinger, S. D., Stone, G. O., &Van Orden, G. C. (1999). Reading homographs: Orthographic, phonologic, and semantic dynamics.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,25, 561–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hino, Y., &Lupker, S. J. (1996). Effects of polysemy in lexical decision and naming: An alternative to lexical access accounts.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,22, 1331–1356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hino, Y., Lupker, S. J., &Pexman, P. M. (2002). Ambiguity and synonymy effects in lexical decision, naming, and semantic categorization tasks: Interactions between orthography, phonology, and semantics.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 686–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hino, Y., Lupker, S. J., Sears, C. R., &Ogawa, T. (1998). The effects of polysemy for Japanese katakana words.Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal,10, 395–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, C. T. (1975). The role of semantic information in lexical decisions.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,1, 130–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jastrzembski, J. E. (1981). Multiple meanings, number of related meanings, frequency of occurrence, and the lexicon.Cognitive Psychology,13, 278–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jastrzembski, J. E., &Stanners, R. F. (1975). Multiple word meanings and lexical search speed.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,14, 534–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, G. V. (1985). Deep dyslexia, imageability, and ease of predication.Brain & Language,24, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joordens, S., &Besner, D. (1994). When banking on meaning is not (yet) money in the bank: Explorations in connectionist modeling.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,20, 1051–1062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kawamoto, A. H., Farrar, W. T., &Kello, C. T. (1994). When two meanings are better than one: Modeling the ambiguity advantage using a recurrent distributed network.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 1233–1247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keil, F. C. (1989).Concepts, kinds and cognitive development. Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellas, G., Ferraro, F. R., &Simpson, G. B. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and the timecourse of attentional allocation in word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,14, 601–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kučera, H., &Francis, W. (1967).Computational analysis of presentday American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichacz, F. M., Herdman, C. M., LeFevre, J., &Baird, B. (1999). Polysemy effects in naming.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,53, 189–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • McRae, K., & Cree, G. S. (in press). Factors underlying category specific semantic deficits. In E. M. E. Forde & G. W. Humphreys (Eds.),Category-specificity in brain and mind. East Sussex, U.K.: Psychology Press.

  • McRae, K., Cree, G. S., Westmacott, R., &de Sa, V. R. (1999). Further evidence for feature correlations in semantic memory.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,53, 360–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • McRae, K., de Sa, V. R., &Seidenberg, M. S. (1997). On the nature and scope of featural representations of word meaning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,126, 99–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medin, D. L. (1989). Concepts and conceptual structure.American Psychologist,44, 1469–1481.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Millis, M. L., &Button, S. B. (1989). The effect of polysemy on lexical decision time: Now you see it, now you don't.Memory & Cognition,17, 141–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pecher, D. (2001). Perception is a two-way junction: Feedback semantics in word recognition.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,8, 545–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pexman, P. M., &Lupker, S. J. (1999). Ambiguity and visual word recognition: Can feedback explain both homophone and polysemy effects?Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,53, 323–334.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pexman, P. M., Lupker, S. J., &Jared, D. (2001). Homophone effects in lexical decision.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,27, 139–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piercey, C. D., &Joordens, S. (2000). Turning an advantage into a disadvantage: Ambiguity effects in lexical decision versus reading tasks.Memory & Cognition,28, 657–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plaut, D. C., &Shallice, T. (1993). Deep dyslexia: A case study of connectionist neuropsychology.Cognitive Neuropsychology,10, 377–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rips, L. J. (1989). Similarity, typicality, and categorization. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.),Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 21–59). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rubenstein, H., Garfield, L., &Millikan, J. A. (1970). Homographic entries in the internal lexicon.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,9, 487–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubenstein, H., Lewis, S. S., &Rubenstein, M. A. (1971). Evidence for phonemic recoding in visual word recognition.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,10, 645–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rueckl, J. G. (1995). Ambiguity and connectionist networks: Still settling into a solution—Comment on Joordens and Besner (1994).Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 501–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidenberg, M. S., &McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming.Psychological Review,96, 523–568.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stolz, J. A., &Neely, J. H. (1995). When target degradation does and does not enhance semantic context effects in word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 596–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, G. O., Vanhoy, M., &Van Orden, G. C. (1997). Perception is a two-way street: Feedforward and feedback phonology in visual word recognition.Journal of Memory & Language,36, 337–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, G. O., &Van Orden, G. C. (1993). Strategic control of processing in word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 744–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strain, E., &Herdman, C. M. (1999). Imageability effects in word naming: An individual differences analysis.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,53, 347–359.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Strain, E., Patterson, K., &Seidenberg, M. S. (1995). Semantic effects in single-word naming.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 1140–1154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Orden, G. C., &Goldinger, S. D. (1994). The interdependence of form and function in cognitive systems explains perception of printed words.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 1269–1291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zevin, J. D., &Balota, D. A. (2000). Priming and attentional control of lexical and sublexical pathways during naming.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 121–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, T2N 1N4, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Penny M. Pexman

  2. University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

    Stephen J. Lupker

  3. Chukyo University, Nagoya, Japan

    Yasushi Hino

Authors
  1. Penny M. Pexman
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephen J. Lupker
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yasushi Hino
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Penny M. Pexman.

Additional information

This research was supported in part by grants to P.M.P. and S.J.L. from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pexman, P.M., Lupker, S.J. & Hino, Y. The impact of feedback semantics in visual word recognition: Number-of-features effects in lexical decision and naming tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 9, 542–549 (2002). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196311

Download citation

  • Received: 02 November 2000

  • Accepted: 02 October 2001

  • Issue Date: September 2002

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196311

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • Word Recognition
  • Lexical Decision
  • Lexical Decision Task
  • Naming Task
  • Visual Word Recognition
Use our pre-submission checklist

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Advertisement

Search

Navigation

  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us
  • Track your research

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Books A-Z

Publish with us

  • Journal finder
  • Publish your research
  • Language editing
  • Open access publishing

Products and services

  • Our products
  • Librarians
  • Societies
  • Partners and advertisers

Our brands

  • Springer
  • Nature Portfolio
  • BMC
  • Palgrave Macmillan
  • Apress
  • Discover
  • Your US state privacy rights
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms and conditions
  • Privacy policy
  • Help and support
  • Legal notice
  • Cancel contracts here

216.73.216.91

Not affiliated

Springer Nature

© 2025 Springer Nature