Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T03:02:38.105Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Contrasting effects of associates and coordinates in children with and without language impairment: A picture–word interference study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2012

PATRICIA J. BROOKS ,
LIAT SEIGER-GARDNER  and
KEVIN SAILOR
PATRICIA J. BROOKS*
Affiliation:
College of Staten Island, City University of New York
LIAT SEIGER-GARDNER
Affiliation:
Lehman College, City University of New York
KEVIN SAILOR
Affiliation:
Lehman College, City University of New York
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Patricia J. Brooks, Department of Psychology, College of Staten Island, City University of New York, 2800 Victory Boulevard, 4S-108, Staten Island, NY 10314. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In picture naming, semantic context words produce either facilitation or inhibition, depending on their relationship to the target-picture name. This study used the picture–word interference task to examine facilitative effects of associates (the word carrot paired with a picture of rabbit) and inhibitory effects of coordinates (mouse paired with a rabbit) in children and adults. Experiment 1 with adults (N = 44) documented robust associate and coordinate effects with either auditory or visual presentation of interfering words. Experiment 2 used auditory presentation of interfering words with children (N = 44, 6 years, 10 months to 11 years, half with typical development, half with specific language impairment). Children showed significant facilitation from associates but no reliable coordinate interference effect. The strength of the associative priming effect in children was correlated with their language abilities (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test and Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals scores). The results indicate the dominant role of association in facilitating word retrieval in speech production in children. In children with specific language impairment, lexical access gains weaker support from networks of associations in semantic memory.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , May 2014 , pp. 515 - 545
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Abdel Rahman, R., & Melinger, A. (2007). When bees hamper the production of honey: Lexical interference from associates in speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 604–614.Google Scholar
Abdel Rahman, R., & Melinger, A. (2009). Semantic context effects in language production: A swinging lexical network proposal and a review. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24, 713–734.Google Scholar
Alario, F.-X., Segui, J., & Ferrand, L. (2000). Semantic and associative priming in picture naming. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology, 53A, 741–764.Google Scholar
Baddeley, A., Gathercole, S., & Papagno, C. (1998). The phonological loop as a language learning device. Psychological Review, 105, 158–173.Google Scholar
Bajo, M.-T. (1988). Semantic facilitation with pictures and words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 579–589.Google Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. (1983). Ad hoc categories. Memory & Cognition, 11, 211–277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bauer, P. J., & Mandler, J. M. (1989). Taxonomies and triads: Conceptual organization in one- to two-year-olds. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 156–184.Google Scholar
Botting, N., & Conti-Ramsden, G. (2001). Non-word repetition and language development in children with specific language impairment (SLI). International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 36, 421–432.Google Scholar
Brooks, P. J., & MacWhinney, B. (2000). Phonological priming in children's picture naming. Journal of Child Language, 27, 335–366.Google Scholar
Brown, L., Sherbenou, R. J., & Johnson, S. K. (1997). The Test of Nonverbal Intelligence: A language free measure of cognitive ability (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
Caramazza, A., & Costa, A. (2000). The semantic interference effect in the picture–word interference paradigm: Does the response set matter? Cognition, 75, B51–64.Google Scholar
Caramazza, A., & Costa, A. (2001). Set size and repetition in the picture–word interference paradigm: Implications for models of naming. Cognition, 80, 291–298.Google Scholar
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cutting, J. C., & Ferreira, V. S. (1999). Semantic and phonological information flow in the production lexicon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 318–344.Google ScholarPubMed
Cycowicz, Y. M., Friedman, D., Rothstein, M., & Snodgrass, J. G. (1997). Picture naming by young children: Norms for name agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 65, 171–237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Damian, M. F., & Bowers, J. S. (2003). Locus of semantic interference in picture–word interference tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 111–117.Google Scholar
Damian, M. F., & Martin, R. C. (1999). Semantic and phonological codes interact in single word production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 345–361.Google Scholar
Davidoff, J., & Roberson, D. (2004). Preserved thematic and impaired taxonomic categorization: A case study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 137–174.Google Scholar
Dockrell, J. E., Messer, D., George, R., & Ralli, A. (2003). Beyond naming patterns in children with WFDs—Definitions for nouns and verbs. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 16, 191–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dollaghan, C., & Campbell, T. F. (1998). Nonword repetition and child language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 1136–1146.Google Scholar
Dunn, L., & Dunn, L. (1997). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (3rd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.Google Scholar
Dunham, P., & Dunham, F. (1995). Developmental antecedents of taxonomic and thematic strategies at 3 years of age. Developmental Psychology, 31, 483–493.Google Scholar
Elbers, L., & van Loon-Vervoorn, A. (1998). Acquiring the lexicon: Evidence from Dutch research. In Gillis, S. & De Houwer, A. (Eds.), The acquisition of Dutch (pp. 301–378). Baltimore, MD: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ellis Weismer, S., Tomblin, J. B., Zhang, X., Buckwalter, P., Chynoweth, J., & Jones, M. (2000). Nonword repetition performance in school-age children with and without language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 865–878.Google Scholar
Faust, M. E., Balota, D. A., Spieler, D. H., & Ferraro, F. R. (1999). Individual differences in information-processing rate and amount: Implications for group differences in response latency. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 777–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faust, M., Dimitrovsky, L., & Davidi, S. (1997). Naming difficulties in language-disabled children: Preliminary findings with the application of the tip-of-the-tongue paradigm. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 1026–1036.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Vella, D., & Kennedy, M. (1989). Children's knowledge of thematic and taxonomic relations at two years of age. Child Development, 60, 911–919.Google Scholar
Gathercole, S. E., Willis, C. S., Baddeley, A. D., & Emslie, H. (1994). The children's test of nonword repetition: A test of phonological working memory. Memory, 2, 103–127.Google Scholar
Gathercole, S. E., Hitch, G. J., Service, E., & Martin, A. J. (1997). Phonological short-term memory and new word learning in children. Developmental Psychology, 33, 966–979.Google Scholar
German, D. J. (1984). Diagnosis of word-finding disorders in children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 353–359.Google Scholar
German, D. J. (1987). Spontaneous language profiles of children with word-finding problems. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 8, 217–230.Google Scholar
German, D. J., & Simon, E. (1991). Analysis of children's word-finding skills in discourse. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 309–316.Google Scholar
Gillam, R. B., Cowan, N., & Marler, J. A. (1998). Information processing by school-age children with specific language impairment: Evidence from a modality effect paradigm. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 913–926.Google Scholar
Glaser, W. R., & Düngelhoff, F. J. (1984). The time course of picture–word interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 640–654.Google Scholar
Glosser, G., Friedman, R. B., Grugan, P. K., Lee, J. H., & Grossman, M. (1998). Lexical semantic and associative priming in Alzheimer's disease. Neuropsychology, 12, 218–224.Google Scholar
Hanauer, J. B., & Brooks, P. J. (2003). Developmental change in the cross-modal Stroop effect. Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 359–366.Google Scholar
Hanauer, J. B., & Brooks, P. J. (2005). Contributions of response set and semantic relatedness to cross-modal stroop-like picture–word interference in children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 90, 21–47.Google Scholar
Hennessey, N. W., Leitão, S., & Mucciarone, K. (2010). Verbal repetition skill in language impaired children: Evidence of inefficient lexical processing? International Journal of Speech–Language Pathology, 12, 47–57.Google Scholar
Jerger, S., Martin, R. C., & Damian, M. F. (2002). Semantic and phonological influences on picture naming by children and teenagers. Journal of Memory and Language, 47, 229–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kail, R. (1991). Processing time declines exponentially during childhood and adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 27, 259–266.Google Scholar
Kail, R. (1992). Processing speed, speech rate, and memory. Developmental Psychology, 28, 899–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kail, R. (1994). A method for studying the generalized slowing hypothesis in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37, 418–421.Google Scholar
La Heij, W., Dirkx, J., & Kramer, P. (1990). Categorical interference and associative priming in picture naming. British Journal of Psychology, 81, 511–525.Google Scholar
Lahey, M., & Edwards, J. (1996). Why do children with specific language impairment name pictures more slowly than their peers? Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 39, 1081–1098.Google Scholar
Lahey, M., & Edwards, J. (1999). Naming errors of children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 195–205.Google Scholar
Leonard, L. B. (1998). Children with specific language impairment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Leonard, L. B., Ellis Weismer, S., Miller, C. A., Francis, D. J., Tomblin, J. B., & Kail, R. V. (2007). Speed of processing, working memory, and language impairment in children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 408–428.Google Scholar
Leonard, L. B., Nippold, A. M., Kail, R., & Hale, A. C. (1983). Picture naming in language impaired children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 26, 609–615.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1–75.Google Scholar
Lupker, S. J. (1979). The semantic nature of response competition in the picture–word interference task. Memory & Cognition, 7, 485–495.Google Scholar
Maguire, M. J., Brier, M. R., & Ferree, T. C. (2010). EEG theta and alpha responses reveal qualitative differences in processing taxonomic versus thematic semantic relationships. Brain and Language, 114, 16–25.Google Scholar
Mahon, B. Z., Costa, A., Peterson, R., Vargas, K. A., & Caramazza, A. (2007). Lexical selection is not by competition: A reinterpretation of semantic interference and facilitation effects in the picture–word interference paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 503–535.Google Scholar
Markman, E. M., & Hutchinson, J. E. (1984). Children's sensitivity to constraints on word meaning: Taxonomic versus thematic relations. Cognitive Psychology, 16, 1–27.Google Scholar
McGregor, K. K. (1997). The nature of word-finding errors of preschoolers with and without word-finding deficits. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 1232–1244.Google Scholar
McGregor, K. K., Friedman, R. M., Reilly, R. M., & Newman, R. M. (2002). Semantic representation and naming in children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 45, 332–346.Google Scholar
McGregor, K. K., & Leonard, L. B. (1989). Facilitating word-finding skills of language-impaired children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54, 141–147.Google Scholar
McGregor, K. K., Newman, R. M., Reilly, R. M., & Capone, N. C. (2002). Semantic representation and naming in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 45, 998–1014.Google Scholar
McGregor, K. K., & Waxman, S. R. (1998). Object naming at multiple hierarchical levels: A comparison of preschoolers with and without word-finding deficits. Journal of Child Language, 25, 419–430.Google Scholar
McGregor, K. K., & Windsor, J. (1996). Effects of priming on the naming accuracy of preschoolers with word-finding deficits. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 39, 1048–1058.Google Scholar
McMurray, B., Samelson, V. M., Lee, S. H., & Tomblin, J. B. (2010). Individual differences in online spoken word recognition: Implications for SLI. Cognitive Psychology, 60, 1–39.Google Scholar
Messer, D., & Dockrell, J. E. (2006). Children's naming and word-finding difficulties: Descriptions and explanations. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 309–324.Google Scholar
Meyer, D. E., & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1971). Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90, 227–234.Google Scholar
Miller, C. A., Kail, R., Leonard, L. B., & Tomblin, J. B. (2001). Speed of processing in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 416–433.Google Scholar
Miller, C. A., Leonard, L. B., Kail, R. V., Zhang, X., Tomblin, J. B., & Francis, D. J. (2006). Response time in 14-year-olds with language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 712–728.Google Scholar
Munson, B., Edwards, J., & Beckman, M. E. (2005). Relationships between nonword repetition accuracy and other measures of linguistic development in children with phonological disorders. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 61–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nelson, K. (1977). The syntagmatic-paradigmatic shift revisited: A review of research and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 834–839.Google Scholar
Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., & Schreiber, T. A. (2004). The University of South Florida free association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 402–407.Google Scholar
Nippold, M. A. (1992). The nature of normal and disordered word finding in children and adolescents. Topics in Language Disorders, 13, 1–14.Google Scholar
Rice, M. L., Buhr, J. C., & Nemeth, M. (1990). Fast mapping word learning abilities of language delayed preschoolers. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55, 33–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosinski, R. R. (1977). Picture–word interference is semantically based. Child Development, 48, 643–647.Google Scholar
Rosinski, R. R., Golinkoff, R. M., & Kukish, K. S. (1975). Automatic semantic processing in a picture–word interference task. Child Development, 46, 247–253.Google Scholar
Sachs, O., Weis, S., Zellagui, N., Huber, W., Zvyagintsev, M., Mathiak, K., et al. (2008). Automatic processing of semantic relations in fMRI: Neural activation during semantic priming of taxonomic and thematic categories. Brain Research, 1218, 194–205.Google Scholar
Sailor, K., Brooks, P. J., Bruening, P. R., Seiger-Gardner, L., & Guterman, M. (2009). Exploring the time course of semantic interference and associative priming in the picture–word interference task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 789–801.Google Scholar
Sass, K., Sachs, O., Krach, S., & Kircher, T. (2009). Taxonomic and thematic categories: Neural correlates of categorization in an auditory-to-visual priming task using fMRI. Brain Research, 1270, 78–87.Google Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.Google Scholar
Schriefers, H., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1990). Exploring the time course of lexical access in language production: Picture–word interference studies. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 86–102.Google Scholar
Seiger-Gardner, L., & Brooks, P. J. (2008). Effects of onset- and rhyme-related distractors on phonological processing in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51, 1263–1281.Google Scholar
Seiger-Gardner, L., Brooks, P. J., & Cadavid, M. (2007, November). Semantic organization of the lexicon in children with specific language impairment: Evidence from a repeated word association task. Poster presented at the American Speech–Language–Hearing Association.Google Scholar
Seiger-Gardner, L., & Schwartz, R. G. (2008). Lexical access in children with and without specific language impairment: A cross-modal picture–word interference study. International Journal of Communication Disorders, 43, 528–551.Google Scholar
Semel, E., Wiig, E. H., & Secord, W. A. (1995). Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals—CELF-3. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Semel, E., Wiig, E. H., & Secord, W. A. (2003). Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals—CELF-4. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Starreveld, P. A., & La Heij, W. (1996). Time-course analysis of semantic and orthographic context effects in picture naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 896–918.Google Scholar
Underwood, G. (1976). Semantic interference from unattended printed words. British Journal of Psychology, 67, 327–338.Google Scholar
Velez, M., & Schwartz, R. (2010). Spoken word recognition in school-age children with SLI: Semantic, phonological and repetition priming. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53, 1616–1628.Google Scholar
Watkins, R. V., Kelly, D. J., Harbers, H. M., & Hollis, W. (1995). Measuring children's lexical diversity: Differentiating typical and impaired language learners. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 1349–1355.Google Scholar
Waxman, S. R., & Namy, L. L. (1997). Challenging the notion of a thematic preference in young children. Developmental Psychology, 33, 555–567.Google Scholar
Windfuhr, K. L., Faragher, B., & Conti-Ramsden, G. (2002). Lexical learning skills in young children with specific language impairment. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 37, 415–432.Google Scholar