How do speakers resist distraction? Evidence from a taboo picture-word interference task.

Even in the presence of irrelevant stimuli, word production is a highly accurate and fluent process. But how do speakers prevent themselves from naming the wrong things? One possibility is that an attentional system inhibits task-irrelevant representations. Alternatively, a verbal self-monitoring system might check speech for accuracy and remove errors stemming from irrelevant information. Because self-monitoring is sensitive to social appropriateness, taboo errors should be intercepted more than neutral errors are. To prevent embarrassment, speakers might also speak more slowly when confronted with taboo distractors. Our results from two experiments are consistent with the self-monitoring account: Examining picture-naming speed (Experiment 1) and accuracy (Experiment 2), we found fewer naming errors but longer picture-naming latencies for pictures presented with taboo distractors than for pictures presented with neutral distractors. These results suggest that when intrusions of irrelevant words are highly undesirable, speakers do not simply inhibit these words: Rather, the language-production system adjusts itself to the context and filters out the undesirable words.

Distractor exclusion is not an early process: a reply to Roelofs, Piai, and Schriefers (2011).

In their comment, Roelofs, Piai, and Schriefers (2011) argue against our interpretation of the distractor frequency effect in terms of a late blocking mechanism. They state that the experiments reported by Dhooge and Hartsuiker (2010) can be incorporated in WEAVER++ when assuming an early input blocking mechanism. We first rectify a misunderstanding regarding the claim of the target article. Next, we show that Roelofs et al. provide no evidence that allows differentiating between early and late blocking accounts. We end by providing evidence in favor of our claim that distractor blocking occurs late and specify our blocking account in terms of verbal self-monitoring.

A late locus of the distractor frequency effect in picture-word interference: evidence from event-related potentials.

In this study, we investigated how people deal with irrelevant contextual information during speech production. Two main models have been proposed. WEAVER++ assumes that irrelevant information is removed from the production system by an early blocking mechanism. On the other hand, the response exclusion hypothesis assumes a blocking mechanism that operates late, after lexical selection has finished. To delineate between these models, we focused on the distractor frequency effect (i.e., longer picture naming latencies in the context of low-frequency compared to high-frequency words) and measured ERPs concurrently. Behaviorally, the distractor frequency effect was replicated. In the ERPs, three effects were found. One effect occurred very early and is interpreted as an effect of low-level visual feature processing. The two other effects occurred after lexical access and are thus in line with the response exclusion hypothesis.

The distractor frequency effect in a delayed picture-word interference task: further evidence for a late locus of distractor exclusion.

A picture-word interference experiment examined the origin of the distractor frequency effect, the effect that pictures are named slower in the context of low-frequency than high-frequency words (Miozzo & Caramazza, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 132, 228-252, 2003). We compared two accounts of the effect: an early, input-related account and a late, response-related account. Participants named high and low-frequency pictures with low and high-frequency distractors in two conditions. In the immediate naming condition, picture and distractor were presented simultaneously. In the delayed naming condition, the distractor was presented 1,000 ms after the picture; pictures had to be named upon distractor presentation. There was a distractor frequency effect in both conditions, but an effect of picture frequency only in the immediate naming condition (showing that in the delayed naming condition, lexical selection had been completed). These results support a late origin of the distractor frequency effect.

Neurophysiological markers of retrieval-induced forgetting in multiplication fact retrieval.

Event-related potential (ERP) counterparts of practice effects in multiplication fact retrieval were examined. Participants performed a multiplication verification task after having practiced a specific problem set. Practice was either active (retrieval of solutions to multiplication problems) or passive (reexposure to the same operands plus the correct result). Behavioral data showed retrieval-induced facilitation for practiced items and retrieval-induced forgetting for related, unpracticed items, irrespective of practice type. ERPs revealed that, for the active practice group, forgetting was reflected in a reduced N100 component time-locked to result onset. Irrespective of practice type, forgetting was also reflected in a reduced result-locked P350 component, whereas facilitation was associated with an increased amplitude of the same component. These results suggest that beneficial and detrimental effects of practice may be mediated by partially distinct processes.

The distractor frequency effect in picture-word interference: Evidence for response exclusion.

In 3 experiments, subjects named pictures with low- or high-frequency superimposed distractor words. In a 1st experiment, we replicated the finding that low-frequency words induce more interference in picture naming than high-frequency words (i.e., distractor frequency effect; Miozzo & Caramazza, 2003). According to the response exclusion hypothesis, this effect has its origin at a postlexical stage and is related to a response buffer. The account predicts that the distractor frequency effect should only be present when a response to the word enters the response buffer. This was tested by masking the distractor (Experiment 2) and by presenting it at various time points before stimulus onset (Experiment 3). Results supported the hypothesis by showing that the effect was only present when distractors were visible, and if they were presented in close proximity to the target picture. These results have implications for the models of lexical access and for the tasks that can be used to study this process.

Verbal-spatial and visuospatial coding of number-space interactions.

A tight correspondence has been postulated between the representations of number and space. The spatial numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect, which reflects the observation that people respond faster with the left-hand side to small numbers and with the right-hand side to large numbers, is regarded as strong evidence for this correspondence. The dominant explanation of the SNARC effect is that it results from visuospatial coding of magnitude (e.g., the mental number line hypothesis). In a series of experiments, we demonstrated that this is only part of the story and that verbal-spatial coding influences processes and representations that have been believed to be purely visuospatial. Additionally, when both accounts were directly contrasted, verbal-spatial coding was observed in absence of visuospatial coding. Relations to other number-space interactions and implications for other tasks are discussed.