What is the interference in "verbal interference"?

Acta Psychol (Amst)

Heidelberg University, Institute of Psychology, Hauptstrasse 47-51, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany. Electronic address:

Published: October 2022

Research on the interrelation between language and other components of cognition makes frequent use of verbal interference paradigms. In this, participants are engaged in a primary nonverbal task, while simultaneously repeating non-sense syllables from memory or playback to occupy their articulatory buffer, which is assumed to block internal language use. However, language production involves different subprocesses and levels of representation, and no previous study has explicitly investigated which of these are affected by an occupied articulatory buffer. Thus, the current study addresses the question whether an occupied articulatory buffer significantly interferes with conceptualization. In Experiment 1, speakers name simple objects as fast and as accurately as they can under three conditions. In an interference condition, the verbalization task runs in parallel to a secondary, syllable memorization/recall task, which was expected to induce a situation in which the articulatory buffer temporarily holds phonological information while speakers engage in conceptualization. The articulatory buffer was not occupied in two control conditions. In Experiment 2, speakers performed a similar but more complex task. They verbally responded to visual depictions of actions, again under an interference condition and two control conditions. Results obtained in both experiments suggested no interference. Taken together, the findings suggest that an occupied articulatory buffer does not significantly affect conceptualization.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103774DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

articulatory buffer
24
occupied articulatory
12
experiment speakers
8
interference condition
8
control conditions
8
articulatory
6
buffer
6
interference
5
interference "verbal
4
"verbal interference"?
4

Similar Publications

What is the interference in "verbal interference"?

Acta Psychol (Amst)

October 2022

Heidelberg University, Institute of Psychology, Hauptstrasse 47-51, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany. Electronic address:

Research on the interrelation between language and other components of cognition makes frequent use of verbal interference paradigms. In this, participants are engaged in a primary nonverbal task, while simultaneously repeating non-sense syllables from memory or playback to occupy their articulatory buffer, which is assumed to block internal language use. However, language production involves different subprocesses and levels of representation, and no previous study has explicitly investigated which of these are affected by an occupied articulatory buffer.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

There is debate regarding whether most articulatory planning occurs offline (rather than online) and whether the products of off-line processing are stored in a separate articulatory buffer until a large enough chunk is ready for production. This hypothesis predicts that delayed naming conditions should reduce not only onset RTs but also word durations because articulatory plans will be buffered and kept ready. We have tested this hypothesis with young control speakers, an aphasic speaker , and an age and education-matched speaker, using repetition, reading and picture-naming tasks.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

The picture word interference (PWI) paradigm and ERPs were used to investigate whether lexical selection in deaf and hearing ASL-English bilinguals occurs via lexical competition or whether the response exclusion hypothesis (REH) for PWI effects is supported. The REH predicts that semantic interference should not occur for bimodal bilinguals because sign and word responses do not compete within an output buffer. Bimodal bilinguals named pictures in ASL, preceded by either a translation equivalent, semantically-related, or unrelated English written word.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

In natural conversation, turns are handed off quickly, with the mean downtime commonly ranging from 7 to 423 ms. To achieve this, speakers plan their upcoming speech as their partner's turn unfolds, holding the audible utterance in abeyance until socially appropriate. The role played by prediction is debated, with some researchers claiming that speakers predict upcoming speech opportunities, and others claiming that speakers wait for detection of turn-final cues.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Response competition better explains Stroop interference than does response exclusion.

Psychon Bull Rev

April 2021

Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Centre for Cognition, Radboud University, Spinoza Building B.02.30, Montessorilaan 3, 6525 HR, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Researchers debate whether Stroop interference from an incongruent word in color-naming response time is caused by response competition or by response exclusion. According to the former account, the interference reflects competition in lexical response selection during color name planning, whereas according to the latter, the interference reflects the removal of a motor program for the incongruent word from an articulatory buffer after planning. Here, numerical predictions about the magnitude of Stroop interference as a function of stimulus onset asynchrony were derived from these accounts.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!