Skip to content
Back to quiz
6. What do dichotic listening tasks suggest?
- Meanings accessed in parallel
- Meanings accessed serially
- All meanings always accessed
- Pps can attend and unattend messages at will
7. What did Foss (1970) phoneme monitering study show?
- Phonemes are harder to detect when the preceding context contains an ambiguous word
- Ambig words are harder to detect when the preceding context contains an ambiguous word
- Phonemes are easier to detect when the preceding context contains an ambiguous word
- Ambiguous words are not easier to process in a strongly biasing context
8. What did Mehler, Segui & Carey find when word length was controlled for?
- Extra processing is still needed for ambiguous words
- Less processing is needed for ambiguous words
- Phoneme monitering tasks are justly sensitive
9. What is set-membership feedback?
- You cannot guess a word simply from its syntactic category
- Context is dependent on meaning
- You cannot guess a word simply from its semantic category
- Context is independet of meaning
10. Why was Swinney et als (1976) study an improvement over previous techniques?
- Online, cross modal priming, not sensitve to other variables and reflect processes as they happen
- Offline, cross modal priming, sensitve to other variables and reflect processes as they happen
- Offline, cross modal priming, not sensitve to other variables and reflect processes as they happen
- Online, cross modal priming, sensitve to other variables and reflect processes as they happen
11. What was the finding of Schvaneveldt et al (1976)?
- Pps were slowest RT when the ambig word was primed, context has NO effect
- Pps were slowest RT when the ambig word was primed, context has an effect
- Pps were fastest RT when the ambig word was primed, context has an effect
- Pps were fastest RT when the ambig word was primed, context has NO effect
12. What does it mean if a word has balanced frequency?
- All alternative meanings are equally common in the language
- All alternative meanings have different frequencies in the language, one meaning is dominant
13. In a study by Tabossi & Zardon (1993), what was the effect of a subordinate constraining context?
- Support for a strong modular account
- Support for multiple access model
- Support for selective priming
14. What did Hogabaum, Perfetti (1975) suggest about frequency effects?
- Because the least frequent sense was 'garden pathed', pps have to reanalyse to fit a dominant meaning with context
- Because the most frequent sense was 'garden pathed', pps have to reanalyse to fit a subordinate meaning with context
- Because the least frequent sense was 'garden pathed', pps have to reanalyse to fit a subordinate meaning with context
- Support for a selective access model
15. In a study by Tanenhaus et al (1979), at what point was their priming for only the context appropriate meaning?
16. Which model did Swinneys (1976) study support?
- An effect of context --> selective access model
- No effect of context --> multiple access model
- No effect of context --> selective access model
- An effect of context --> multiple access model
17. When is meaning used in the context-guided single-reading lexical access model?
- a
- When an ambiguous word is encountered, ALL meanings are accessed independent of context and contextually appropriate meaning is selected
- Context is used to restrict access of meanings, so ONLY the contextually appropriate meaning is ever accessed
- a
18. In the influential study by Swinney et al (1979) where primes were ambiguous words in a biasing context, what was the EARLY effect of context?
- There was only priming for the APPROPRIATE meaning; context had NO effect
- There was priming for BOTH appropriate and inappropriate meanings; context had an effect
- There was priming for BOTH appropriate and inappropriate meanings; context had NO effect
- There was only priming for the APPROPRIATE meaning; context had no effect
19. Which semantic model explains Rodd et al (2002s) lexical decision task data?
- Semantic features; Recognition was faster for words with MANY senses and fewer meanings
- Semantic features; Recognition was faster for words with fewer senses and MANY meanings
- Syntactic features; Recognition was faster for words with MANY senses and fewer meanings
- Syntactic features;Recognition was faster for words with fewer senses and MANY meanings
20. What is an issue with phoneme monitering tasks?
- Temporally too slow
- Too sensitive to ambiguity
- Sensitive to variables other than ambiguity
- Dont accurately measure activation