More modeling but still no stages: Reply to Borowsky and Besner.

Abstract

Plaut and Booth (2000) developed a distributed connectionist model of written word comprehension and evaluated it against empirical findings on individual and developmental differences in semantic priming in visual lexical decision. Borowsky and Besner (2006) raised a number of challenges for this model. First, the model was not shown to be capable of accurately distinguishing words from orthographically matched nonwords. Second, its use of a semantic measure for performing lexical decision appears inconsistent with evidence of normal lexical decision in brain-damaged patients with semantic impairments. Third, the explanation offered for additive and interactive effects in the model appears incompatible with certain aspects of existing empirical findings on the joint effects word frequency, priming context, and stimulus quality. In this reply, the authors demonstrate with additional modeling that none of these issues is problematic for the model. Key words: connectionist modeling, lexical processing, semantic priming The study of semantic priming in lexical tasks has yielded rich and highly intricate patterns of results that have provided important insights into the nature of lexical and semantic processing (see McNamara, 2005; Neely, 1991, for reviews). As various theories

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 39 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.