1 / 20

Theories of Priming II : Types of Primes Timothy McNamara Journal of Experimental Psychology,1994

Theories of Priming II : Types of Primes Timothy McNamara Journal of Experimental Psychology,1994. 조 성 식. Contents. Introduction. Experiment 1 : unrelated ⇔ neutral, nonword (unrelated & neutral). Experiment 2 : unrelated ⇔ neutral, nonword (unrelated & nonword).

vinnie
Download Presentation

Theories of Priming II : Types of Primes Timothy McNamara Journal of Experimental Psychology,1994

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Theories of Priming II : Types of Primes Timothy McNamara Journalof Experimental Psychology,1994 조 성 식

  2. Contents Introduction Experiment 1 : unrelated ⇔ neutral, nonword (unrelated & neutral) Experiment 2 : unrelated ⇔ neutral, nonword (unrelated & nonword) Experiment 3 : same as experiment 1 but in rapidly paced Experiment 4 : same as McKoon & Ratcliff but target location changed General Discussions Conclusions

  3. Introduction (1/3) The Goals of this article • To determine how association in memory gives rise to priming Spreading-Activation Model vs. Non-Spreading-Activation Model (Compound Cue model ) - McKoon & Ratcliff(1992,94) argued against the Spreading-Activation Model.

  4. Introduction (2/3) In the first article (1992) • Three step mediated priming in lexical decisions occurred. • (e.g. gift – birthday – cake – pie ) • ☞ predicted by spreading-activation theories but not the non-SAM. • 2. Semantic priming occurred at a lag of 1 but not a lag of 2 • in a rapidly paced sequential task. • ☞ compound cues contained three but not four items. • 3. If compound cues contained three items, • ☞ lion-tiger-vase should be faster than truck-tiger-vase but not. • ☞ lonk-lion-tiger should be slower than long-lion-tiger but not.

  5. Introduction (3/3) Types of Primes

  6. Experiment 1[ unrelated ⇔ neutral, nonword (unrelated & neutral) ] Goals • to compare performance in the unrelated, • neutral, and nonword prime conditions. • (manipulated unrelated & neutral) Methods • Subjects : 39 undergraduates • Materials & Design • Procedure Results

  7. Experiment 2[unrelated ⇔ neutral, nonword (unrelated & nonword)] Goals • to compare performance in the unrelated, neutral, and nonword prime conditions. • (manipulated unrelated & nonword) Methods • Subjects : 40 undergraduates • identical to experiment 1 except that between trial relatedness was manipulated • in the unrelated & nonword prime conditions. Results

  8. Experiment 3 (same as experiment 1 but in rapidly paced) Goals • Any differences in shorter interval ? Methods • Subjects : 56 undergraduates • identical to experiment 1 but removing nonword prime trials • and reducing elapsed 3,200ms to 550ms Results

  9. Experiment 4 (same as McKoon & Ratcliff but target location changed) Goals • To compare with McKoon & Ratcliff’s experiments Methods • Subjects : 40 undergraduates • same materials and design as experiment 3 • same as McKoon & Ratcliff but target location changed Results

  10. General Discussion (1/3) The important findings in the four experiments • Semantic priming occurred in each experiment. • The speed and the accuracy of responses were virtually identical • in the unrelated-word, neutral, and nonword prime conditions. • No evidence that between-trials semantic priming was larger in either the neutral or • nonword prime conditions than in the unrelated-word prime condition. Summary of Parts I & II - Three-step priming seems to occur in lexical decisions. -> predicted by spreading activation but not by non spreading activation. - Compound cues contain three but not four successive items. -> but cake–pie–letter does not occur. (not faster than case-pie-letter) • If compound cues contain three items, then the lexical status of • the item preceding the prime should affect responses to the target. • -> but lonk-cake–pie were not slower than long-case-pie. - No evidence that performance was inhibited or facilitated by nonword or neutral primes. No evidence that these primes were replaced by targets on preceding trials.

  11. General Discussion (2/3) More arguments on Compound cue model • Mediated priming • • Spreading Activation : prime - mediator 1 - mediator 2 - target • • Compound cue : prime – target (weakly and directly associated) • Priming on post target word • • Spreading Activation : prime – target – post target • • Compound cue : prime – target – post target (not expected if the post target word • receives most of the weight in the compound cue) • Sequential effects • • Compound cue provides a new model of sequential effects ? • • Sequential effects are a response effect, not a memory effect.

  12. General Discussion (3/3) Alternative models • Masson’s model(1992) • • Pronunciation Task • Hopfield net(1986) • • organized conceptually as three processing modules, which correspond to • orthographic, phonological, and semantic knowledge.

  13. Conclusions The results were more consistent with Spreading Activation theory but a critic could argue that : • Multiple-step priming is not definitive. • (because weak direct associations may exist between the primes and the targets.) • It may be possible to explain the lag effects if the parameters in a model of memory and a model of response latency are set in just the right way, or • nonword and neutral primes are replaced by extralist contextual elements. Spreading-Activation continues to be a compelling candidate for a basic mechanism of retrieval in human memory. ※ PDP (Parallel Distributed Processing) : 병렬분산처리 - 인지과정이 뇌의 여러 영역에 분산되어 있는 지식을 이용하는 병렬적 조작에 기초 - 기억은 뉴런과 같은 단위들의 네트워크로 구성

  14. * * * * * 350 ms

  15. Blank interval 500 ms

  16. prime 300 ms

  17. Blank interval 50 ms

  18. target m key for words, z key for nonwords

  19. ERROR A response was incorrect. 1 sec

  20. Blank interval for next trial : 2 sec

More Related