Abstract
Introduction. Information is often ambiguous. Several theories suggest that the resolution of ambiguity involves an implicit selection of solution options, the result of which manifests itself in long-term negative and/or positive after-effects. However, in experimental studies, these effects are often mixed, leading to interpretations of the results. This study aims to identify and distinguish these effects.
Methods. In this study a within-subject design was used. A total of 56 volunteers (21 males, 35 females; mean age: 25, SD = 5.8) took part in the study. In the first stage, the participants completed unambiguous and ambiguous fragmented word combinations. In the second stage, the participants completed fragmented nouns, some of which appeared in the first stage and some were alternatives not selected in the first stage of completion.
Results. In the first stage of the experiment, ambiguous stimuli were completed slower and with more errors (ambiguity disadvantage effect). In the second stage, presentation of the same nouns resulted in the positive priming effect for both ambiguous and non-ambiguous stimuli. Positive and negative after-effects of resolving implicit competition have not been identified.
Discussion. The results obtained can be explained by the fact that the implicit response competition has no long-term aftereffects. Another explanation is that the second stage uses tasks that do not require semantic processing and that the word is retrieved by a low-level letter processing before aftereffects of a previous choice appear.
Conclusion. Experimental data may support theories that consider only the short-term aftereffects of implicit competition. However, additional verification of the results is required using a task involving the semantic level of information processing.
References
Алексеева, С. В., Слюсарь, Н. А. (2017). Орфографические соседи в русском языке: база данных и эксперимент, направленный на изучение морфологической декомпозиции. Вопросы психолингвистики, 32(2), 12–27.
Аллахвердов, В. М. (1993). Опыт теоретической психологии (в жанре научной революции). Печатный двор.
Аллахвердов, В. М. (2000). Сознание как парадокс. Издательство ДНК.
Лаптева, Н. М., Валуева, Е. А., Белова, С. С. (2018). Прайминг-эффекты в задаче лексического решения на стимулах-словах с одинаковым буквенным составом. Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики, 15(4), 747–757. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2018-4-747-757
Мамина, Т. М. (2013). Влияние неактуализированных значений слова-омонима на эффективность решения анаграмм. Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Социология, (1), 29–34.
Мамина, Т. М., Дедова, Е. А. (2013). Особенности восприятия и узнавания полисемии и омонимии. Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Социология, (4), 3–9.
Савчук, С. О., Архангельский, Т. А., Бонч-Осмоловская, А. А., Донина, О. В., Кузнецова, Ю. Н., Ляшевская, О. Н., Орехов Б. В., Подрядчикова, М. В. (2024). Национальный корпус русского языка 2.0: новые возможности и перспективы развития. Вопросы языкознания, 2, 7–34. https://doi.org/10.31857/0373-658X.2024.2.7-34
Слюсарь Н. А., Алексеева С. В. (2017). Орфографические соседи с заменой буквы при изучении механизмов лексического доступа. Компьютерная лингвистика и интеллектуальные технологии, 16(23).
Филиппова, М. Г., Аллахвердов, В. М. (2020). Конкретизация выбранного смысла в процессе восприятия двойственных изображений. Психология. Журнал высшей школы экономики, 17(2), 355–366. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2020-2-356-366
Филиппова М. Г., Морошкина Н. В. (2015). Осознаваемая и неосознаваемая многозначность: два вида когнитивного контроля. Сибирский психологический журнал, (56), 37–55. https://doi.org/10.17223/17267080/56/4
Филиппова М. Г., Чернов Р. В., Горбунов И. А. (2023). Незамеченные, но не забытые: ээг-корреляты прайминг-эффектов двойственных изображений, Журнал высшей нервной деятельности им. И.П. Павлова, 73(3), 348–356. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0044467723030061
Черниговская, Т. В., Аллахвердов, В. М., Коротков, А. Д., Гершкович, В. А., Киреев, М. В., Прокопеня, В. К. (2020). Мозг человека и многозначность когнитивной информации: конвергентный подход. Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология, 36(4), 675–686. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2020.406
Allakhverdov, V., Filippova, M. G., Gershkovich, V. A., Karpinskaia, V. Y., Scott, T. V., & Vladykina, N. P. (2019). Consciousness, learning, and control: On the path to a theory. A. Cleeremans, V. Allakhverdov, & M. Kuvaldina (Eds.). Implicit learning: 50 years on (pp. 71–107). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315628905-4
Anderson, M. C. (2003). Rethinking interference theory: Executive control and the mechanisms of forgetting. Journal of memory and language, 49(4), 415–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2003.08.006
Anderson, M. C., & Bell, T. (2001). Forgetting our facts: the role of inhibitory processes in the loss of propositional knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(3), 544–570. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-3445.130.3.544
Anderson, M. C., Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (1994). Remembering can cause forgetting: retrieval dynamics in long-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(5), 1063–1087. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.20.5.1063
Bajo, M. T., Gómez-Ariza, C. J., Fernandez, A., & Marful, A. (2006). Retrieval-induced forgetting in perceptually driven memory tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(5), 1185–1194. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.32.5.1185
Bäuml, K-H.T., & Kliegl, O. (2017) Retrieval-Induced Remembering and Forgetting. Wixted, J.T. (ed.). Cognitive Psychology of Memory, Vol. 2 of Learning and Memory: A Comprehensive Reference. Academic Press. http://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.21048-1
Butler, K. M., Williams, C. C., Zacks, R. T., & Maki, R. H. (2001). A limit on retrieval-induced forgetting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(5), 1314–1319. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.27.5.1314
Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, J. T., & Besner, D. (2022). Access to the internal lexicon. In Attention and performance VI (pp. 535–555). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003309734-29
Dixon, P., & Twilley, L. C. (1999). Context and homograph meaning resolution. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 53(4), 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087321
Duffy, S. A., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 27(4), 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(88)90066-6
Filippova, M.G. (2011). Does unconscious information affect cognitive activity?: A study using experimental priming. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 14(1), 20–36. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_sjop.2011.v14.n1.2
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1990). Language comprehension as structure building. Hillsdale.
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1997). Two decades of structure building. Discourse processes, 23(3), 265–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539709544994
Gernsbacher, M. A., Keysar, B., Robertson, R. R., & Werner, N. K. (2001). The role of suppression and enhancement in understanding metaphors. Journal of Memory and Language, 45(3), 433–450. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2782
Gernsbacher, M. A., Robertson, R. R. W., & Werner, N. K. (2001). The costs and benefits of meaning. In D. S. Gorfein (Ed.). On the consequences of meaning selection: Perspectives on resolving lexical ambiguity (pp. 119–137). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10459-007
Gorfein, D. S. (2001). An activation–selection view of homograph disambiguation: A matter of emphasis? In D. S. Gorfein (Ed.). On the consequences of meaning selection: Perspectives on resolving lexical ambiguity (pp. 157-173). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10459-009
Gorfein, D. S., Brown, V. R., & DeBiasi, C. (2007). The activation–selection model of meaning: Explaining why the son comes out after the sun. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1986–2000. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192931
Heyman, T., Van Akeren, L., Hutchison, K. A., & Storms, G. (2016). Filling the gaps: A speeded word fragment completion megastudy. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 1508–1527. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0663-3
Kireev, M., Korotkov, A., Masharipov, R., Zheltyakova, M., Cherednichenko, D., Gershkovich, V., Moroshkina, N., Slioussar, N., Allakhverdov, V. & Chernigovskaya, T. (2022). Suppression of non-selected solutions as a possible brain mechanism for ambiguity resolution in the word fragment task completion task. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 1829. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-05646-5
Kutuzov, A., & Kuzmenko, E. (2017). WebVectors: a toolkit for building web interfaces for vector semantic models. In: Analysis of Images, Social Networks and Texts: 5th International Conference. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52920-2_15
Levy, B. A., & Kirsner, K. (1989). Reprocessing text: Indirect measures of word and message level processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15(3), 407–417. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.15.3.407
Maciejewski, G., & Klepousniotou, E. (2020). Disambiguating the ambiguity disadvantage effect: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence for semantic competition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(9), 1682–1700. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000842
MacLeod, C. M. (1989). Word context during initial exposure influences degree of priming in word fragment completion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15(3), 398–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.15.3.398
Massol, S., Molinaro, N., & Carreiras, M. (2015). Lexical inhibition of neighbors during visual word recognition: an unmasked priming investigation. Brain research, 1604, 35–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2015.01.051
McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. Psychological review, 88(5), 375–407. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.88.5.375
Peirce, J., Gray, J. R., Simpson, S., MacAskill, M., Höchenberger, R., Sogo, H., Kastman E., & Lindeløv, J. K. (2019). PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior research methods, 51, 195–203. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y
Piercey, C. & Joordens, S. (2000). Turning an advantage into a disadvantage: Ambiguity effects in lexical decision versus reading tasks. Memory & Cognition, 28(4), 657–666. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03201255
Perea, M., & Rosa, E. (2000). Repetition and form priming interact with neighborhood density at a brief stimulus onset asynchrony. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 7(4), 668–677. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03213005
Pollatsek, A., Perea, M., & Binder, K. S. (1999). The effects of "neighborhood size" in reading and lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25(4), 1142.
Raaijmakers, J. G., & Jakab, E. (2013). Rethinking inhibition theory: On the problematic status of the inhibition theory for forgetting. Journal of memory and language, 68(2), 98–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.10.002
Rodd, J., Gaskell, G., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2002). Making sense of semantic ambiguity: Semantic competition in lexical access. Journal of memory and language, 46(2), 245–266. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2001.2810
Roediger, H. L., & Blaxton, T. A. (1987). Effects of varying modality, surface features, and retention interval on priming in word-fragment completion. Memory & cognition, 15(5), 379–388. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197728
Roediger, H. L., Weldon, M. S., Stadler, M. L., & Riegler, G. L. (1992). Direct comparison of two implicit memory tests: word fragment and word stem completion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(6), 1251–1269. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.18.6.1251
Rupprecht, J., & Bäuml, K. H. T. (2016). Retrieval-induced forgetting in item recognition: Retrieval specificity revisited. Journal of Memory and Language, 86, 97–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.09.003
Schacter, D. L. (1987). Implicit memory: History and current status. Journal of experimental psychology: learning, memory, and cognition, 13(3), 501. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.13.3.501
Shivde, G., & Anderson, M. C. (2001). The role of inhibition in meaning selection: Insights from retrieval-induced forgetting. In D. S. Gorfein (Ed.), On the consequences of meaning selection: Perspectives on resolving lexical ambiguity (pp. 175–190). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10459-010
Simpson, G. B., & Burgess, C. (1985). Activation and selection processes in the recognition of ambiguous words. Journal of experimental psychology: Human perception and performance, 11(1), 28–39. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.11.1.28
Simpson, G. B., & Krueger, M. A. (1991). Selective access of homograph meanings in sentence context. Journal of Memory and Language, 30(6), 627–643. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(91)90029-J
Smith, M. C. (1991). On the recruitment of semantic information for word fragment completion: Evidence from bilingual priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17(2), 234–244. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.17.2.234
Snodgrass, J. G., & Mintzer, M. (1993). Neighborhood effects in visual word recognition: Facilitatory or inhibitory? Memory & Cognition, 21(2), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03202737
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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.8.4.336
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2024 Russian Psychological Journal