Adjudicating conflict in speech production-Do we need a central selection mechanism?
Adjudicating conflict in speech production-Do we need a central selection mechanism?
复制标题
裁决言语产生中的冲突——我们需要一个中央选择机制吗？
DOI：
10.1080/02643294.2019.1608171
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Navarrete,Eduardo
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mahon,BradfordZ;Navarrete,Eduardo
关于心理过程和状态的哲学问题……是如何产生的？第一步是完全被忽视的一步。我们谈论过程和状态，却没有决定它们的性质。我们想，也许有一天我们会对它们有更多的了解。但这正是我们以特定方式看待问题的原因。（Wittgenstein，1953，§ 308）从心理词典中检索单词通常被概念化为一个选择过程，其中中央“词汇选择”机制通过某种规则或功能或随机过程来裁决，许多激活的单词中的哪些将被优先考虑以进行进一步处理。 “中央”意味着选择机制在功能上作为瓶颈运行，因为表示必须由该机制（以某种方式）处理，以便确定优先级以进行进一步处理。从历史上看，所提出的不同选择机制都强调不同类型的经验证据。 “竞争选择”的假设强调，与语义不相关的上下文相比，当在语义类别坐标的上下文中命名图片时，会观察到更慢的命名延迟和更高的错误率（有关讨论，请参见 Damian & Bowers，2003；La Heij，1988；Schnur、Schwartz、Brecher 和 Hodgson，2006）。从语义干扰到词汇竞争的论点是，增加非目标词激活的上下文会导致选择时更长且更嘈杂的比较过程，这意味着更长的生产时间和/或更低的准确性。词汇选择的非竞争模型最初是为了解释错误的类型和分布而开发的
How does the philosophical problem about mental processes and states… arise? The first step is the one that altogether escapes notice. We talk of processes and states and leave their nature undecided. Sometime perhaps we shall know more about them–we think. But that is just what commits us to a particular way of looking at the matter.(Wittgenstein, 1953, § 308)Retrieving words from the mental lexicon is generally conceptualized as a selection process, in which a central “lexical selection” mechanism adjudicates, through some rule or function or stochastic process, which of the many activated words will be prioritized for further processing. By “central” is meant that the selection mechanism functionally operates as a bottleneck, in that representations must be processed (in some way) by that mechanism in order to be prioritized for further processing. Historically, the different mechanisms of selection that have been proposed have emphasized different types of empirical evidence. The hypothesis of “selection by competition” emphasized observations of slower naming latencies and higher error rates when pictures are named in the context of within semantic-category coordinates, compared to semantically unrelated contexts (for discussion, see Damian & Bowers, 2003; La Heij, 1988; Schnur, Schwartz, Brecher, & Hodgson, 2006). The argument from semantic interference to lexical competition is that contexts that increase the activation of non-target words lead to a longer and noisier comparison process at selection, which translates to longer production times and/or lower accuracy. Noncompetitive models of lexical selection were initially developed to explain the types and distributions of errors