Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T04:22:03.009Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Single-word shadowing and the study of lexical access

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Hua Liu,
Elizabeth Bates,
Tracy Powell and
Beverly Wulfeck
Hua Liu
Affiliation:
University of California, San Diego
Elizabeth Bates*
Affiliation:
University of California, San Diego
Tracy Powell
Affiliation:
San Diego State University
Beverly Wulfeck
Affiliation:
San Diego State University
*
Elizabeth Bates, Center for Research in Language 0526, UCSD, La Jolla, CA 92093-0526
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A new procedure called single-word shadowing was applied to the study of lexical access in context. Subjects listened to word pairs or sentences recorded in one voice and were asked to repeat the target word signaled by a voice shift. This technique yielded rapid and robust priming effects in normal adult subjects in word pairs and in a sentence context. Regression analyses showed that the semantic priming effects were large and significant, even when several additional factors believed to affect lexical access were controlled. Evidence was found for robust semantic priming in the healthy elderly and in children from 7 to 11 years of age, and there was also evidence for a change in the size and nature of context effects across the lifespan. Because single-word shadowing works across a broad age range and does not require reading, secondary tasks, or metalinguistic judgments, it is a promising tool for the study of lexical access in a range of different populations.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , April 1997, pp. 157 - 180
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Altarriba, J., & McNamara, T. P. (1991). Evidence of interlingual facilitation effects in priming under contextually and temporally constrained conditions. Unpublished manuscript, University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Balota, D. A. (1992). Visual word recognition: The journey from feature to meaning. In Gernsbacher, M. (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Balota, D. A., & Chumbley, J. L. (1984). Are lexical decisions a good measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 340–357.Google ScholarPubMed
Balota, D. A., & Duchek, J. M. (1991). Semantic priming effects, lexical repetition effects, and contextual disambiguation effects in healthy aged individuals and individuals with senile dementia of the Alzheimer type. Brain and Language, 40, 181–201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, E., Devescovi, A., Pizzamiglio, L., D'Amico, S., & Hernandez, A. (1995). Gender and lexical access in Italian. Perception Psychophysics, 57, 847–862.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, E., Tzeng, O., Lu, C., Liu, H. (1997). Grammatical classifiers and word recognition in Chinese. Manuscript in preparation. University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Bloom, P. A., & Fischler, I. (1980). Completion norms for 329 sentence contexts. Memory and Cognition, 8, 631–642.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blumstein, S., Milberg, W., & Shrier, R. (1982). Semantic processing in aphasia: Evidence from an auditory lexical decision task. Brain and Language, 17, 301–315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borowsky, R., & Besner, D. (1993). Visual word recognition: A multistage activation model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19, 813–840.Google ScholarPubMed
Chapman, R. S., Streim, N., Crais, E., Salmon, D., & Negri, N., Strand, E. (1992). Child talk: Assumptions of a developmental process for early language learning. InChapman, R. S. (Ed.), Processes in language acquisition and disorders (pp. 3–19). St Louis:Mosby Year Book.Google Scholar
Chistovich, L. (1960). Classification of rapidly repeated speech sounds. Akusticheskii Zhurnal 6, 392–398. [in Russian]Google Scholar
Connine, C. M., Mullennix, J., Shernoff, E., & Yelen, J. (1990). Word familiarity and frequency in visual and auditory word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 1084–1096.Google ScholarPubMed
Forster, K. I., & Chambers, S. M. (1973). Lexical access and naming time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 627–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frauenfelder, U., & Tyler, L. (Eds.). (1987). Spoken word recognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.Google ScholarPubMed
Friederici, A., & Schriefers, H. (1992). Sentence context effects in word recognition: Evidence from young, older, and aphasic adults. [Abstract]. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Psychology, 14.Google Scholar
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1983). Memory for the orientation of pictures in nonverbal stories: Parallels and insights into language processing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Gernsbacher, M. A., & Faust, M. E. (1991). The mechanism of suppression: A component of general comprehension skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 17, 245–262.Google ScholarPubMed
Glaser, W. M. (1992). Picture naming. Cognition, 42, 61–105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. (1988). Working memory, comprehension, and aging: A review and a new view. In Bower, G. H. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 22, pp. 193–225). San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
Hernandez, A. E., Bates, E., & Avila, L. X. (1996). Processing across the language boundary: A cross-modal priming study in Spanish-English bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 846–864.Google ScholarPubMed
Herron, D. (1994). Acoustic and contextual roles in the processing of open-class and closedclass words. Unpublished manuscript. University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Kucera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English.Providence, Rl: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nature, 307, 161–163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Landauer, T. K., Didner, R. S., Fowlkes, E. B. (1974). Processing stages in word naming: Reaction time effect of letter degradation and word frequency. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Light, L. L., Burke, D. M. (1988). Patterns of language and memory in old age. In Light, L. L.Burke, D. M. (Eds.), Language, memory and aging. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorsbach, T. C., Sodoro, J. (1992). The dissociation of repetition priming and recognition memory in languagelearning-disabled children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,54, 121–146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luce, P. A., Pisoni, D. B., Goldinger, S. D. (1990). Similarity neighborhoods of spoken words. In Altmann, G. T. M. (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W. (1973). Linguistic structure and speech shadowing at very short latencies.Nature, 244, 522–523.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marslen-Wilson, W. (1985). Speech shadowing and speech comprehension. Speech Comprehension, 4, 55–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W. (1990). Activation, competition, and frequency in lexical access. In Altmann, G. T. M. (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Meyer, D. E., Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1971). Facilitation in recognizing words: Evidence of a dependence upon retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90, 227–234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neely, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In Besner, D.Humphreys, G. W. (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Visual word recognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Nusbaum, H. C., Morin, T. M. (1989). Perceptual normalization of talker differences. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85, S125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oldfield, R. C., Wingfield, A. (1965). Response latencies in naming objects. QuarterlyJournal of Experimental Psychology, 17, 273–281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Posner, M. C., Snyder, C. (1975). Facilitation and inhibition in the processing of signals. In Rabbitt, P.Domic, S. (Eds.), Attention and performance (Vol. 5, pp. 669–683). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Slowiaczek, L. M. (1994). Semantic priming in a single-word shadowing task. American Journal of Psychology, 107, 245–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, L. C., Theodor, L., Franklin, P. E. (1983). On the relationship between contextual facilitation and depth of processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 9, 697–712.Google ScholarPubMed
Smith, M. C., Besner, D., Miyoshi, H. (1994). New limits to automaticity: Context modulates semantic priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 104–115.Google Scholar
Swinney, D. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 645–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanenhaus, M. K., Leiman, J. M., Seidenberg, M. S. (1979). Evidence for multiple stages in the processing of ambiguous words in syntactic context. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18 427–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, L. K., Marslen-Wilson, W. (1981). Childrens processing of spoken language. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 400–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Petten, C., Kutas, M. (1987). Ambiguous words in context: An event-related potential analysis of the time course of meaning activation. Journal of Memory and Language,26, 188–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar