Effects of near and distant semantic neighbors on word production.
One way to examine the dynamics of word processing is to investigate how processing is affected by the co-activation of similar words ("neighbors"). A unique prediction of attractor dynamical models is that near neighbors should exert inhibitory effects and distant neighbors should exert facilitative effects. In study 1, data from 62 unselected chronic aphasia patients revealed a higher rate of semantic errors for words with many near semantic neighbors and fewer semantic errors for words with many distant semantic neighbors. In study 2, this basic result was replicated in controls using a speeded picture-naming paradigm. Together, these two studies provide strong new evidence consistent with the attractor dynamics view of neighborhood effects. In addition, analyses of correlations between effect sizes and lesion locations, and comparisons with the existing literature on semantic deficits in aphasia and the speeded picture-naming paradigm, all provide converging evidence that the semantic error patterns found in the present studies were due to disruptions of cognitive control mechanisms.
Moss Rehabilitation Research Institute, 50 Township Line Rd. Elkins Park, Philadelphia, PA 19027, USA. mirmand@einstein.edu
Daniel
D
Mirman
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001037:Aphasia / Q000473:pathology / Q000503:physiopathology; D001288:Attention; D002540:Cerebral Cortex / Q000473:pathology / Q000503:physiopathology; D004192:Discrimination, Psychological / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009275:Names; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual / Q000502:physiology*; D010775:Photic Stimulation / Q000379:methods; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology; D012660:Semantics; D014825:Vocabulary
Neuroimage. 2006 May 1;30(4):1414-32
16413796
Brain Lang. 2008 Jan;104(1):24-32
17408733
Psychol Rev. 2004 Jan;111(1):205-35
14756594
Cogn Sci. 2009;33(4):665-708
19543434
Brain. 2009 Sep;132(Pt 9):2593-608
19506072
Neuropsychologia. 2000;38(9):1207-15
10865096
Brain. 1996 Apr;119 ( Pt 2):611-25
8800952
Psychol Rev. 1997 Oct;104(4):801-38
9337631
Behav Res Methods. 2005 Nov;37(4):547-59
16629288
Mem Cognit. 1996 Mar;24(2):173-87
8881321
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2004 Oct;30(5):942-55
15462632
J Cogn Neurosci. 2007 May;19(5):761-75
17488203
Cogn Sci. 2005 Jul 8;29(4):627-54
21702787
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Jan 6;106(1):322-7
19118194
Brain. 2006 Aug;129(Pt 8):2132-47
16815878
Cereb Cortex. 2010 Nov;20(11):2728-38
20190005
Neurosci Lett. 2002 May 31;325(1):72-4
12023069
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Dec 23;94(26):14792-7
9405692
Brain. 2009 Dec;132(Pt 12):3411-27
19942676
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2007 Dec;8(12):976-87
18026167
Brain Lang. 2008 Jan;104(1):89-101
17482254
Neuropsychologia. 2003;41(3):280-92
12457754
Ear Hear. 1998 Feb;19(1):1-36
9504270
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2000 May;26(3):719-50
10855428
J Cogn Neurosci. 2010 Jul;22(7):1597-613
19580383
Neuropsychologia. 2007 Oct 1;45(13):2883-901
17675110
Cogn Neuropsychol. 2010 Sep;27(6):495-504
21714742
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2002 Sep;2(3):187-213
12775185
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Jan;34(1):65-79
18194055
Cereb Cortex. 2008 Nov;18(11):2574-85
18308708
Brain Lang. 2011 May;117(2):53-68
21371743
Neuropsychologia. 2009 Nov;47(13):2721-31
19500608
Mem Cognit. 2003 Sep;31(6):842-55
14651293
Annu Rev Psychol. 2008;59:617-45
17705682
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2005 Sep;5(3):263-81
16396089
Curr Biol. 2010 May 25;20(10):964-8
20451381
Brain. 2007 Apr;130(Pt 4):1127-37
17438021
Neuropsychologia. 2008 Jan 31;46(2):649-58
17961610