Memory processes underlying long-term semantic priming

Memory processes underlying long-term semantic priming Was Woltz Hirsch

Tag layer of the DHSS Meta-Tagging Project. The article text is reproduced from the staged copy named in sourceDesc and is not altered; the tags are held separately in standOff so that overlapping and nested spans are preserved.

Memory processes underlying long-term semantic priming 2019 Memory & Cognition 10.3758/s13421-018-0867-8 Was2019-memory-processes-underlying-long-term-semant Was2019-memory-processes-underlying-long-term-semant.txt, the project's staged copy 66229c052473e1cb691f67c1463231724fcd5bdd not-redistributable cognitive-psychology

the paper's own words

the tag layer; a sentence written by the tagger about the paper, always anchored to a quotation but not itself a quotation

0 spans located by searching the stored text for the quote's exact words, allowing any whitespace between them mechanism Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. long-term semantic priming Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. behavioural-experiment behavioural-experiment Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. mechanisms The memory process supporting long-term priming shifts with how the relevant part of semantic memory is organised associatively status: the paper's own words: we propose that Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. mechanisms Because categories are hierarchically organised under a shared label, a prime trial and a target trial repeat the very same label-retrieval and comparison operation, and that repetition is what speeds the target Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. mechanisms Synonyms and antonyms have no superordinate label to re-retrieve, so priming there can only come from incremental strengthening of the abstract semantic features the words share Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. mechanisms Operation-specific facilitation appears only in the category domain because of the hierarchical structure of category knowledge Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. The evaluation operations manipulated in the two experiments were not equivalent, so the operations themselves - not the semantic content - may have produced the difference in priming. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. The manipulation of content evaluations could not be made isomorphic across the two experiments. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. Participants may have used one shared strategy for both synonym and antonym decisions, and the authors have no data to rule this out. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. The question is not settled by these two experiments and needs a wider range of stimuli, task demands and prime-target lags. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. a separate set of 64 stimulus groups was built to serve as filler trials, separating prime trials from target trials eliminates: that the priming effect is carried by adjacency - that prime and target are simply consecutive · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. long-term semantic priming long-term semantic priming Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. semantic memory representations semantic memory representations Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. memory for prior cognitive operations memory for prior cognitive operations Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. word meanings word meanings Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. category membership category membership Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. TWO RIVAL MECHANISMS, TWENTY YEARS APART, STATED AS ALTERNATIVES: `Quotation withheld.` One says the concept got stronger; the other says the subject remembers what they did. They are not degrees of the same account - one is about the representation and the other about the act - and until this paper the literature had been arguing which Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. AND THE ANSWER IS NEITHER - IT IS BOTH, SPLIT BY CONTENT: `Quotation withheld.` A dissociation inside a phenomenon the field had treated as one thing, told apart only by varying the material while holding the task constant. This is the corpus's own thesis arriving as somebody else's empirical result: one term, two mechanisms, and no way to see it without the manipulation Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. THE DESIGN POINT IS THE SAME ONE erb2019 MAKES, ONE RECORD APART: `Quotation withheld.` The earlier literature compared mechanisms across experiments differing in more than the variable of interest. Two consecutive records now say a body of results is uninterpretable because a confound was not held constant - erb2019 about associative-priming overlap, this about task differences - and neither is a critique paper. Both are ordinary empirical papers that had to clear the ground before they could ask anything Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. AND THE ASYMMETRY IS EXPLAINED RATHER THAN NAMED - A CATEGORY HAS A LABEL AND A SYNONYM PAIR DOES NOT. Evaluating whether roses and carnations share a category activates `flower`, and the next trial repeats that same evaluation against that same label; but `Quotation withheld.` There is no operation to repeat, so only strengthening is left. The mechanism is derived from the structure of the material rather than fitted to the result, which is what makes it a prediction for the next study rather than a description of this one Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. builds-on → Woltz (2010) and Woltz et al. (2015) Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. replicates → Woltz and Was (2007) Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. contradicts → Woltz and Was (2007) Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. semantic memory representations —causes→ long-term semantic priming semantic memory representations long-term semantic priming direction on the measure: increases · strength of the relation: 0.9 · note: ONE OF TWO MECHANISMS, AND THE EDGE IS ONLY TRUE IN ONE CONTENT DOMAIN. The quote says 'Long-term semantic priming of word meanings was dependent on' this - not long-term priming generally. Read alone this edge overstates; read with its twin below it is the paper's finding. The 'moderates' gap again: the content domain conditions which mechanism applies and there is no way to say so on an edge, so it is said in the note and quoted whole in the second sense. Weight 0.9. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. memory for prior cognitive operations —causes→ long-term semantic priming memory for prior cognitive operations long-term semantic priming direction on the measure: increases · strength of the relation: 0.9 · note: THE OTHER MECHANISM, on the same sentence and at the same weight, and the pair is the point. This one holds for CATEGORY MEMBERSHIP only - and the fourth sense explains why, from the structure of the material: a category has a label that the same evaluation is repeated against, and a synonym pair has nothing to repeat. Recording either edge without the other would turn a dissociation into a claim about the phenomenon as a whole, which is the thing this paper exists to refute. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. word meanings —contrasted-with→ category membership word meanings category membership strength of the relation: 0.95 · note: THE CONTRAST IS THE INSTRUMENT. These two content domains are not being compared for their own sake - varying them while holding the task constant is what made the two mechanisms separable, and the previous literature could not do it because it varied the task as well (third sense). Weight 0.95: the contrast is explicit in the quote and it is the paper's whole design. Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the two kinds of priming depend on different memory processes; contrasted-with between the stimuli is loose. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. ANOVA ANOVA Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. power analysis power analysis Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. t-test t-test Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. effect size effect size Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. confidence interval confidence interval Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. mean mean Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. Across two structurally matched experiments, long-term semantic priming turned out to rest on different memory processes depending on the kind of semantic content being processed. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. Priming of word meanings rested on strengthened abstract semantic representations, whereas priming of category membership rested on memory for the cognitive operations performed earlier. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. In the category experiment, facilitation was larger when the prime trial required the same evaluation (exemplar or feature) as the target trial. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. Category priming survived, though reduced, when prime and target operations differed, indicating a general rise in availability of category information on top of the operation-specific component. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. In the word-meaning experiment, matching versus mismatching the synonym/antonym evaluation across prime and target made no difference to the size of priming. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. Both experiments produced semantic priming that persisted over an average of seven unrelated intervening trials. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. Priming measured in response rate was larger for category comparisons than for word-meaning comparisons. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. Strategic processing did not produce larger priming effects as the experiment progressed. Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. semantic priming semantic priming Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. rate of correct responses (RCR) rate of correct responses (RCR) Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. expectancy expectancy Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. prime condition prime condition Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. evaluation operation evaluation operation Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. rate of correct responses (RCR) rate of correct responses (RCR) Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. assignment of stimulus set assignment of stimulus set Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. prime-target lag prime-target lag Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. response time response time Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. percentage of errors percentage of errors Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. 90 — participants in each experiment (Experiment 1: 68 female, 22 male) Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. F(1,84) = 62.18 — overall category priming effect in Experiment 1, primed versus unprimed target trials Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. F(1,84) = 34.53 — effect of whether the prime trial used the same evaluation operation as the target trial, in Experiment 1 Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. F(1,84) = 5.97, p = .017 — overall word-meaning priming effect in Experiment 2, much smaller than the category effect Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. Seventy-two — category stimulus groups built for Experiment 1, each with target stimuli and two prime sets Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution. t(89) = 6.42, d = .57 — priming effect for category evaluations in the first six trials, compared with d = .20 in the last six Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.

The full text of this article is not redistributable, so it is not included here. The evidence sentences are withheld with it; the tag layer and its grounding status remain. The article itself is at https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-018-0867-8.