{"pk":31793,"title":"Levels of Competition in Lexical Access","subtitle":null,"abstract":"For a visual word to be recognised it must be singled\nout from a m o n g all other possible candidates. T h e\nless distinct a lexical entry is the more candidates\nthere will be competing with it, and so recognition\nwill be inhibited. In opposition to this view the fin-\ndings of Andrews (1989,1992) show a facilitatory ef-\nfect of neighborhood size; low frequency words which\nbore orthographic similarity to m a n y other words\nwere recognised more quickly, than those with fewer\nneighbors. Since neighborhood size as determined by\nColtheaurts \" N \" metric was designed as essentially a\nmeasure of lexical similarity, Andrews result could be\ninterpreted as evidence for lexical level facilitation.\nIn the present experiments w e repeat both the Idt\nand naming studies of Andrews using a more tightly\ncontrolled stimulus set. Only in L D T are her results\nsupported, in naming w e find no facilitatory effect of\nneighborhood size. W e discuss w h y any truly lexical\nlevel facilitation is inherently improbable.","language":"eng","license":{"name":"","short_name":"","text":null,"url":""},"keywords":[],"section":"Submitted Presentations","is_remote":true,"remote_url":"https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4pv109kf","frozenauthors":[{"first_name":"Julie","middle_name":"K .","last_name":"Voice","name_suffix":"","institution":"University of Edinburgh","department":""}],"date_submitted":null,"date_accepted":null,"date_published":"1993-01-01T18:00:00Z","render_galley":null,"galleys":[{"label":"PDF","type":"pdf","path":"https://journalpub.escholarship.org/cognitivesciencesociety/article/31793/galley/22861/download/"}]}