Caramazza A, Costa A
Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA.
Cognition. 2001 Jul;80(3):291-8. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0277(00)00137-2.
Caramazza and Costa (Cognition 75 (2000) B51) reported results which demonstrate that a semantically related word distractor interferes in picture naming even when it is not in the response set and there is no possibility for mediated interference. They interpreted the results to be problematic for the model of lexical access proposed by Levelt, Roelofs, and Meyer (Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (1999) 1). Roelofs (Cognition 80 (2001, this issue 283--90)) argues that those results are not inconsistent with Levelt et al.'s model when certain new assumptions about the mechanism of lexical selection are considered. Here we show that even with these assumptions the model still makes the wrong predictions. We report new results which demonstrate that the semantic interference and facilitation effects that are obtained respectively in the basic-level and category-level naming variants of the picture-word interference paradigm are not the result of response set size and response repetitions.
卡拉马扎和科斯塔（《认知》第75卷（2000年）B51）报告的结果表明，即使语义相关的单词干扰项不在反应集中且不存在中介干扰的可能性，它也会干扰图片命名。他们认为这些结果对于莱尔特、罗洛夫斯和迈耶提出的词汇通达模型（《行为与脑科学》第22卷（1999年）1）来说是有问题的。罗洛夫斯（《认知》第80卷（2001年，本期283 - 90））认为，当考虑到关于词汇选择机制的某些新假设时，这些结果与莱尔特等人的模型并不矛盾。在这里我们表明，即使有这些假设，该模型仍然做出了错误的预测。我们报告了新的结果，这些结果表明在图片 - 单词干扰范式的基本水平和类别水平命名变体中分别获得的语义干扰和促进效应不是反应集大小和反应重复的结果。
