
doi: 10.3758/bf03194965
pmid: 12184565
We conducted two experiments to examine whether the interpretation of an ambiguous noun phrase is influenced by exposure to a similar combination. In Experiment 1, we found that it was easier to verify a definition for a combination (e.g., adolescent doctor, a doctor for adolescents) when the prime used the same relation as the target (e.g., adolescent magazine, a magazine for adolescents; animal doctor, a doctor for animals) than when the prime used a different relation (e.g., country doctor; adolescent experience). In Experiment 2, we found that the interpretation generated for an ambiguous combination was affected by prior exposure to sentences containing a combination with the same modifier or head noun as the target combination. The data are inconsistent with key predictions of schema-based theories of conceptual combination. Although the results do not contradict key assumptions of relation-based theories, modifications to these theories are required to account for these data.
Random Allocation, Reaction Time, Humans, Vocabulary
Random Allocation, Reaction Time, Humans, Vocabulary
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 51 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
