Neighborhood in Decay: Working Memory Modulates Effect of Phonological Similarity on Lexical Access

Karl David Neergaard, James Richard Britton, Chu-ren Huang

Research output: Unpublished conference presentation (presented paper, abstract, poster)Conference presentation (not published in journal/proceeding/book)Academic researchpeer-review

Abstract

A mainstay of models that account for the access of lexical knowledge is that auditory words compete for selection based on form similarity, commonly seen in an inhibitory effect to greater phonological neighborhood density (PND). PND is a metric that states that two words are neighbors if they differ by the addition, deletion or substitution of a single phoneme. A drawback to this account is that there is competing evidence even among the European languages investigated thus far. We sought to verify whether the inhibitory effect of greater PND would hold for Mandarin Chinese in two auditory word repetition tasks with monosyllabic and disyllabic Mandarin words. Results of Experiment 1 showed a facilitative effect to greater PND. Experiment 2 added a non-verbal distractor task to lessen the putative effect of working memory load during the task. The facilitative effect to greater PND was confirmed along with a significant post-hoc interaction with memory decay, operationalized as the duration spent on the distractor tasks. The facilitative effects extend previous reports of differential behavior due to linguistic typology.
Original languageEnglish
Publication statusPublished - 2019
EventThe 41st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society - Montreal, Canada
Duration: 24 Jul 201927 Jul 2019
https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/cogsci-2019/

Competition

CompetitionThe 41st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society
Country/TerritoryCanada
CityMontreal
Period24/07/1927/07/19
Internet address

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Neighborhood in Decay: Working Memory Modulates Effect of Phonological Similarity on Lexical Access'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this