Semantic classification of pictures and words

REFERENCES

• Almeida, J., Knobel, M., Finkbeiner, M., & Caramazza, A. (2007). The locus of the frequency effect in picture naming: When recognizing is not enough. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 1177–1182. doi: 10.3758/BF03193109
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amsel, B. D. (2011). Tracking real-time neural activation of conceptual knowledge using single-trial event-related potentials. Neuropsychologia, 49, 970–983. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.01.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amsel, B. D., & Cree, G. S. (2013). Semantic richness, concreteness, and object domain: An electrophysiological study. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 117–129. doi: 10.1037/a0029807
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amsel, B. D., Urbach, T. P., & Kutas, M. (2012). Perceptual and motor attribute ratings for 559 object concepts. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 1028–1041. doi: 10.3758/s13428-012-0215-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H., & Yap, M. J. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 283–316. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.2.283
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balota, D. A., Ferraro, F. R., & Connor, L. T. (1991). On the early influence of meaning in word recognition: A review of the literature. In P. J. Schwanenflugel (Ed.), the psychology of word meanings (pp. 187–222). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., … Treiman, R. (2007). The english lexicon project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445–459. doi: 10.3758/BF03193014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 22, 577–660.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, E., D'Amico, S., Jacobsen, T., Székely, A., Andonova, E., Devescovi, A., … Tzeng, O. (2003). Timed picture naming in seven languages. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 344–380. doi: 10.3758/BF03196494
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett, S. D. R., Burnett, A. N., Siakaluk, P. D., & Pexman, P. M. (2011). Imageability and body-object interaction ratings for 599 multisyllabic nouns. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 1100–1109. doi: 10.3758/s13428-011-0117-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond kučera and francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for american english. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 977–990. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.977
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buchanan, L., Westbury, C., & Burgess, C. (2001). Characterizing semantic space: Neighborhood effects in word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 531–544. doi: 10.3758/BF03196189
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess, C., & Lund, K. (2000). The dynamics of meaning in memory. In E. Dietrich & A. B. Markman (Eds.), cognitive dynamics: Conceptual and representational change in humans and machines (pp. 117–156). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Caramazza, A., & Shelton, J. R. (1998). Domain-specific knowledge systems in the brain: The animate-inanimate distinction. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 1–34. doi: 10.1162/089892998563752
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Catling, J. C., & Johnston, R. A. (2006). The effects of age of acquisition on an object classification task. Visual Cognition, 13, 968–980. doi: 10.1080/13506280544000138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chainay, H., & Humphreys, G. W. (2002). Privileged access to action for objects relative to words. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 348–355. doi: 10.3758/BF03196292
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, J. T., & Besner, D. (1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornic (Ed.), attention and performance VI (pp. 535–555). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Cortese, M. J., & Fugett, A. (2004). Imageability ratings for 3,000 monosyllabic words. Behavior Research Methods, Instrumentation, & Computers, 36, 384–387. doi: 10.3758/BF03195585
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cree, G. S., & McRae, K. (2003). Analyzing the factors underlying the structure and computation of the meaning of chipmunk, cherry, chisel, cheese, and cello (and many other such concrete nouns). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 163–201. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.132.2.163
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faust, M. E., Balota, D. A., Spieler, D. H., & Ferraro, F. R. (1999). Individual differences in information-processing rate and amount: Implications for group differences in response latency. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 777–799. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.777
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Federmeier, K. D., & Kutas, M. (2001). Meaning and modality: Influences of context, semantic memory organization, and perceptual predictability on picture processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27, 202–224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ganis, G., Kutas, M., & Sereno, M. I. (1996). The search for “common sense”: An electrophysiological study of the comprehension of words and pictures in reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 89–106. doi: 10.1162/jocn.1996.8.2.89
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., Fennema-Notestine, C., & Morris, S. K. (2005). Bilingualism affects picture naming but not picture classification. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1220–1234. doi: 10.3758/BF03193224
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grondin, R., Lupker, S. J., & McRae, K. (2009). Shared features dominate semantic richness effects for concrete concepts. Journal of Memory & Language, 60, 1–19. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2008.09.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hargreaves, I. S., Leonard, G., Pexman, P. M., Pittman, D., Siakaluk, P. D., & Goodyear, B. G. (2012). The neural correlates of the body-object interaction effect in semantic processing. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hargreaves, I. S., & Pexman, P. M. (2012). Does richness lose its luster? effects of extensive practice on semantic richness in visual word recognition. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00234
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hargreaves, I. S., Pexman, P. M., Johnson, J. S., & Zdrazilova, L. (2012). Richer concepts are better remembered: Number of features effects in free recall. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hino, Y., Pexman, P. M., & Lupker, S. J. (2006). Ambiguity and relatedness effects in semantic tasks: Are they due to semantic coding?. Journal of Memory & Language, 55, 247–273. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2006.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffman, P., Lambon Ralph, M. A., & Rogers, T. T. (2013). Semantic diversity: A measure of semantic ambiguity based on variability in the contextual usage of words. Behavior Research Methods, 45, 718–730. doi: 10.3758/s13428-012-0278-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hogaboam, T. W., & Pellegrino, J. W. (1978). Hunting for individual differences in cognitive processes: Verbal ability and semantic processing of pictures and words. Memory & Cognition, 6, 189–193. doi: 10.3758/BF03197445
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, G. V. (1985). Deep dyslexia, imageability, and ease of predication. Brain & Language, 24, 1–19. doi: 10.1016/0093-934X(85)90094-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kounios, J., Green, D. L., Payne, L., Fleck, J. I., Grondin, R., & McRae, K. (2009). Semantic richness and the activation of concepts in semantic memory: Evidence from event-related potentials. Brain Research, 1282, 95–102. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2009.05.092
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of the acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211–240. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.104.2.211
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marques, J. F., & Raposo, A. (2011). Structural dimensions of object pictures: Organization and relation to object decision and naming. Visual Cognition, 19, 705–729. doi: 10.1080/13506285.2011.575414
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marques, J. F., Raposo, A., & Almeida, J. (2013). Structural processing and category-specific deficits. Cortex, 49, 266–275. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2011.10.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McRae, K. (2005). Semantic memory: Some insights from feature-based connectionist attractor networks. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), the psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory, 45, (pp. 41–86). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• McRae, K., Cree, G. S., Seidenberg, M. S., & McNorgan, C. (2005). Semantic feature production norms for a large set of living and nonliving things. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 547–559. doi: 10.3758/BF03192726
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McRae, K., de Sa., V. R., & Seidenberg, M. (1997). On the nature and scope of featural representations of word meaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 99–130. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.126.2.99
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, C. J., & Price, C. J. (1999). Three distinct ventral occipitotemporal regions for reading and object naming. NeuroImage, 10, 181–192. doi: 10.1006/nimg.1999.0450
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oldfield, R. C., & Wingfield, A. (1965). Response latencies in naming objects. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 17, 273–281. doi: 10.1080/17470216508416445
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45, 255–287. doi: 10.1037/h0084295
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pecher, D. & Zwaan, R. A. (2005). Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pexman, P. M. (2012). Meaning based influences on visual word recognition. In J. S. Adelman (Ed.), visual word recognition, Vol 2 (pp. 24–43). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pexman, P. M., Hargreaves, I. S., Edwards, J. D., Henry, L. C., & Goodyear, B. G. (2007). The neural consequences of semantic richness: When more comes to mind, less activation is observed. Psychological Science, 18, 401–406. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01913.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pexman, P. M., Hargreaves, I. S., Siakaluk, P. D., Bodner, G. E., & Pope, J. (2008). There are many ways to be rich: Effects of three measures of semantic richness on visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 161–167. doi: 10.3758/PBR.15.1.161
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pexman, P. M., Holyk, G. G., & Monfils, M.-H. (2003). Number of features effects and semantic processing. Memory & Cognition, 31, 842–855. doi: 10.3758/BF03196439
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pexman, P. M., Lupker, S. J., & Hino, Y. (2002). The impact of feedback semantics in visual word recognition: Number of features effects in lexical decision and naming tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 542–549. doi: 10.3758/BF03196311
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plaut, D. C., & Shallice, T. (1993). Deep dyslexia: A case study of connectionist neuropsychology. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 10, 377–500. doi: 10.1080/02643299308253469
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potter, M. C., & Faulconer, B. A. (1975). Time to understand pictures and words. Nature, 253, 437–438. doi: 10.1038/253437a0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potter, M. C., So, K.-F., Von Eckardt, B., & Feldman, L. B. (1984). Lexical and conceptual representation in beginning and proficient bilinguals. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 23, 23–38. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(84)90489-4
   Google Scholar
• Ratcliff, R., Gomez, P., & McKoon, G. (2004). A diffusion model account of the lexical-decision task. Psychological Review, 111, 159–182. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.111.1.159
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saussure, F. (1916). Course in general linguistics. New York, USA: McGraw Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2001). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
   Google Scholar
• Schock, J., Cortese, M. J., & Khanna, M. M. (2012). Imageability estimates for 3,000 disyllabic words. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 374–379. doi: 10.3758/s13428-011-0162-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shallice, T. (1988). Specialisation within the semantic system. special issue: The cognitive neuropsychology of visual and semantic processing of concepts. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 5, 133–142. doi: 10.1080/02643298808252929
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaoul, C., & Westbury, C. (2010). Exploring lexical co-occurrence space using HiDEx. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 393–413. doi: 10.3758/BRM.42.2.393
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shelton, J. R., & Caramazza, A. (1999). Deficits in lexical and semantic processing: Implications for models of normal language. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 5–27. doi: 10.3758/BF03210809
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siakaluk, P. D., Pexman, P. M., Aguilera, L., Owen, W. J., & Sears, C. R. (2008). Evidence for the activation of sensorimotor information during visual word recognition: The body-object interaction effect. Cognition, 106, 433–443. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.12.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siakaluk, P. D., Pexman, P. M., Sears, C. R., Wilson, K., Locheed, K., & Owen, W. J. (2008). The benefits of sensorimotor knowledge: Body-object interaction facilitates semantic processing. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 32, 591–605. doi: 10.1080/03640210802035399
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Székely, A., D'Amico, S., Devescovi, A., Federmeier, K., Herron, D., Iyer, G., … Bates, E. (2005). Timed action and object naming. Cortex, 41, 7–25. doi: 10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70174-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Székely, A., Jacobsen, T., D'Amico, S., Devescovi, A., Andonova, E., Herron, D., … Bates, E. (2004). A new on-line resource for psycholinguistic studies. Journal of Memory & Language, 51, 247–250. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2004.03.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, K. I., Devereux, B. J., Acres, K., Randall, B., & Tyler, L. K. (2012). Contrasting effects of feature-based statistics on the categorisation and basic-level identification of visual objects. Cognition, 122, 363–374. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.11.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tillotson, S. M., Siakaluk, P. D., & Pexman, P. M. (2008). Body-Object interaction ratings for 1,618 monosyllabic nouns. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 1075–1078. doi: 10.3758/BRM.40.4.1075
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tousignant, C., & Pexman, P. M. (2012). Flexible recruitment of semantic richness: Context modulates body-object interaction effects in lexical-semantic processing. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00053
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vandekerckhove, J., Verheyen, S., & Tuerlinckx, F. (2010). A crossed random effects diffusion model for speeded semantic categorization decisions. Acta Psychologica, 133, 269–282. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2009.10.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagenmakers, E.-J., van der Maas, H. L. J., & Grasman, R. P. P. P. (2007). An EZ-diffusion model for response time and accuracy. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 3–22. doi: 10.3758/BF03194023
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yap, M. J., & Balota, D. A. (2009). Visual word recognition of multi-syllabic words. Journal of Memory & Language, 60, 502–529. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2009.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yap, M. J., Pexman, P. M., Wellsby, M., Hargreaves, I. S., & Huff, M. (2012). An abundance of riches: Cross-task comparisons of semantic richness effects in visual word recognition. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00053
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yap, M. J., Tan, S. E., Pexman, P. M., & Hargreaves, I. S. (2011). Is more always better? effects of semantic richness on lexical decision, speeded pronunciation, and semantic classification. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 742–750. doi: 10.3758/s13423-011-0092-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yarkoni, T., Balota, D. A., & Yap, M. J. (2008). Moving beyond coltheart's N: A new measure of orthographic similarity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 971–979. doi: 10.3758/PBR.15.5.971
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yates, M. (2005). Phonological neighbors speed visual word processing: Evidence from multiple tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 31, 1385–1397.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoon, E. Y., & Humphreys, G. W. (2007). Dissociative effects of viewpoint and semantic priming on action and semantic decisions: Evidence for dual routes to action from vision. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 601–623. doi: 10.1080/17470210600701007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar