Abstract
A psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm was used to isolate the locus of the picture—word interference effect along the chain of processes subtended in name production. Two stimuli were presented sequentially on each trial, separated by a varying stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA). The first stimulus, S1, was a tone that required a manual response. The second stimulus, S2, was a picture—word stimulus associated with picture naming. The distractor word was conceptually related to the picture on half of the trials, and unrelated in the other trials. A picture—word interference effect was found at long SOA, but not at short SOA. Such underadditive interaction between SOA and semantic relatedness suggests strongly that the locus of the picture—word interference effect is functionally earlier than the PRP effect locus. The results are discussed in relation to models of word production suggesting the involvement of central mechanisms in the selection of lexical output.
Article PDF
References
Bloem, I., van den Boogaard, S., &La Heij, W. (2004). Semantic facilitation and semantic interference in language production: Further evidence for the conceptual selection model of lexical access.Journal of Memory & Language,51, 307–323.
Carrier, L. M., &Pashler, H. (1995). Attentional limits in memory retrieval.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 1339–1348.
Costa, A., Alario, F.-X., &Caramazza, A. (2005). On the categorical nature of the semantic interference effect in the picture—word interference paradigm.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,12, 125–131.
Dell’Acqua, R., Jolicoeur, P., Pascali, A., &Pluchino, P. (2007). Short-term consolidation of individual identities leads to lag-1 sparing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,33, 593–609.
Dell’Acqua, R., Lotto, L., &Job, R. (2000). Naming times and standardized norms for the Italian PD/DPSS set of pictures: Direct comparisons with American, English, French, and Spanish published databases.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,32, 588–615.
Fagot, C., &Pashler, H. (1992). Making two responses to a single object: Implications for the central attentional bottleneck.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 1058–1059.
Ferreira, V. S., &Pashler, H. (2002). Central bottleneck influences on the processing stages of word production.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 1187–1199.
Finkbeiner, M., &Caramazza, A. (2006). Now you see it, now you don’t: On turning semantic interference into facilitation in a Strooplike task.Cortex,42, 790–796.
Glaser, W. R., &Düngelhoff, F.-J. (1984). The time course of picture—word interference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 640–654.
Jolicoeur, P., &Dell’Acqua, R. (1998). The demonstration of shortterm consolidation.Cognitive Psychology,36, 138–202.
Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., &Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,22, 1–75.
MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review.Psychological Bulletin,109, 163–203.
Meyer, D. E., &Kieras, D. E. (1997). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and human multiple-task performance: Part II. Accounts of psychological refractory-period phenomena.Psychological Review,104, 749–791.
Miozzo, M., &Caramazza, A. (2003). When more is less: A counterintuitive effect of distractor frequency in the picture—word interference paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,132, 228–252.
Pashler, H. (1994a). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory.Psychological Bulletin,116, 220–244.
Pashler, H. (1994b). Graded capacity-sharing in dual-task interference?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 330–342.
Pashler, H., &Johnston, J. C. (1989). Chronometric evidence for central postponement in temporally overlapping tasks.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,41A, 19–45.
Potter, M. C., Dell’Acqua, R., Pesciarelli, F., Job, R., Peressotti, F., &O’Connor, D. (2005). Bidirectional semantic priming in the attentional blink.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,12, 460–465.
Roelofs, A. (1992). A spreading-activation theory of lemma retrieval in speaking.Cognition,42, 107–142.
Roelofs, A. (2003). Goal-referenced selection of verbal action: Modeling attentional control in the Stroop task.Psychological Review,110, 88–125.
Ruthruff, E., Johnston, J. C., &Van Selst, M. (2001). Why practice reduces dual-task interference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,27, 3–21.
Snodgrass, J. G., &Yuditsky, T. (1996). Naming times for the Snodgrass and Vanderwart pictures.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,28, 516–536.
Tombu, M., &Jolicoeur, P. (2003). A central capacity sharing model of dual task performance.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,29, 3–18.
Tombu, M., &Jolicoeur, P. (2004). Virtually no evidence for virtually perfect time-sharing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,30, 795–810.
Tombu, M., &Jolicoeur, P. (2005). Testing the predictions of the central capacity sharing model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,31, 790–802.
Van Selst, M., &Jolicoeur, P. (1994a). Can mental rotation occur before the dual-task bottleneck?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 905–921.
Van Selst, M., &Jolicoeur, P. (1994b). A solution to the effect of sample size on outlier elimination.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,47A, 631–650.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dell’Acqua, R., Job, R., Peressotti, F. et al. The picture-word interference effect is not a Stroop effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 14, 717–722 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196827
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196827