Not all identification tasks are born equal: testing the involvement of production processes in perceptual identification and lexical decision
The distinction between identification and production processes suggests that implicit memory should require more attention resources when there is a competition between alternative solutions during the test phase. The present two experiments assessed this hypothesis by examining the effects of divided attention (DA) at encoding on the high- and low-response-competition versions of perceptual identification (Experiment 1) and lexical decision (Experiment 2). In both experiments, words presented in the high-response-competition condition had many orthographic neighbours and at least one higher-frequency neighbour, whereas words presented in the low-response-competition condition had few orthographic neighbours and no higher-frequency neighbour. Consistent with the predictions of the identification/production distinction, Experiment 1 showed that DA reduced repetition priming in the high-, but not in the low-response-competition version of perceptual identification; in contrast, DA had comparable effects in the two versions of lexical decision (Experiments 2). These findings provide the first experimental evidence in support of the hypothesis that perceptual identification, a task nominally based on identification processes, might involve a substantive production component.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Andrews, S. (1989). Frequency and neighbourhood effects on lexical access: Activation or search? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15(5), 802–814.Google Scholar
- Andrews, S. (1992). Frequency and neighbourhood effects on lexical access: Lexical similarity or orthographic redundancy? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(2), 234–254.Google Scholar
- Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, J. T., & Besner, D. (1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance VI (pp. 535–555). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Craik, F. M., Moscovitch, M., & McDowd, J. M. (1994). Contributions of surface and conceptual information to performance on implicit and explicit memory tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 864–875. doi: 10.1037/0278-7318.104.22.1684.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gabrieli, J. E., Vaidya, C. J., Stone, M., Francis, W. S., Thompson-Schill, S. L., Fleischman, D. A., & Wilson, R. S. (1999). Convergent behavioral and neuropsychological evidence for a distinction between identification and production forms of repetition priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128(4), 479–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Monsell, S. (1987). On the relation between lexical input and output pathways for speech. In A. Allport, D. G. MacKay, W. Prinz, A. Allport, D. G. MacKay, W. Prinz (Eds.), Language perception and production: Relationships between listening, speaking, reading and writing (pp. 273–311). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Mulligan, N. W., & Besken, M. (2013). Implicit memory. In D. Reisberg (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive psychology (pp. 220–231). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Roediger, H., & McDermott, K. (1993). Implicit memory in normal human subjects. In F. Boller & J. Grafman (Eds.), Handbook of neuropsychology (pp. 63–131). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
- Schacter, D. L. (1994). Priming and multiple memory system: Perceptual mechanisms of implicit memory. In D. L. Schacter, E. Tulving (Eds.), Memory systems 1994 (pp. 233-268). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Sears, C. R., Hino, Y., & Lupker, S. J. (1995). Neighbourhood size and neighbourhood frequency effects in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21(4), 876–900.Google Scholar
- Tulving, E., Schacter, D. L., & Stark, H. A. (1982). Priming effects in word-fragment completion are independent of recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 8(4), 336–342.Google Scholar
- Van Assche, E., Duyck, W., & Gollan, T. H. (2016). Linking recognition and production: Cross-modal transfer effects between picture naming and lexical decision during first and second language processing in bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 89, 37–54. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2016.02.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar