The degree of semantic similarity between an anaphoric noun phrase (e.g., the bird) and its antecedent (e.g., a robin) is known to affect the anaphor resolution process, but the mechanisms that underlie this effect are not known. One proposal (Almor, 1999) is that semantic similarity triggers interference effects in working memory and makes two crucial assumptions: First, semantic similarity impairs working memory just as phonological similarity does (e.g., Baddeley, 1992), and, second, this impairment interferes with processes of sentence comprehension. We tested these assumptions in two experiments that compared recall accuracy between phonologically similar, semantically similar, and control words in sentence contexts. Our results do not provide support for Almor's claims: Phonological overlap decreased recall accuracy in sentence contexts, but semantic similarity did not. These results shed doubt on the idea that semantic interference in working memory is an underlying mechanism in anaphor resolution.
AlmorA. (1999). Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: The informational load hypothesis.Psychological Review106, 4748–765.
2.
AlmorA.KemplerD.MacDonaldM. C.AndersenE. S.TylerL. K. (1999). Why do Alzheimer patients have difficulty with pronouns? Working memory, semantics, and reference in comprehension and production in Alzheimer's disease.Brain and Language67, 3202–227.
3.
BaddeleyA. (1966). Short-term memory for word sequences as a function of acoustic, semantic and formal similarity.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology18, 362–365.
4.
BaddeleyA. (1992). Working memory.Science255, 556–559.
5.
BattigW. F.MontagueW. E. (1969). Category norms for verbal items in 56 categories: A replication and extension of Connecticut category norms.Journal of Experimental Psychology80, 1–46.
6.
BurgessC. (1998). From simple associations to the building blocks of language: Modeling meaning in memory with the HAL model.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers30, 2188–198.
7.
CampoyG.BaddeleyA. (2008). Phonological and semantic strategies in immediate serial recall.Memory16, 4329–340.
8.
CohenJ. D.MacWhinneyB.FlattM.ProvostJ. (1993). PsyScope: A new graphic interactive environment for designing psychology experiments.Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers25, 2257–271.
9.
CowlesH. W.GarnhamA. (2005). Antecedent focus and conceptual distance effects in category noun-phrase anaphora.Language and Cognitive Processes20, 725–750.
10.
CrowderR. G. (1979). Similarity and order in memory.The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory. BowerG. H.New York: Academic Press13, 319–353.
11.
DuffyS. A.RaynerK. (1990). Eye movements and anaphor resolution: Effects of antecedent typicality and distance.Language and Speech33, 2103–119.
12.
GarrodS.SanfordA. (1977). Interpreting anaphoric relations—integration of semantic information while reading.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior16, 177–90.
13.
GroszB.WeinsteinS.JoshiA. (1995). Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse.Computational Linguistics21, 2203–225.
14.
HaarmanH.UsherM. (2001). Maintenance of semantic information in capacity-limited item short-term memory.Psychological Bulletin and Review8, 3568–578.
15.
HamptonJ. A.GardinerM. M. (1983). Measures of internal category structure: A correlational analysis of normative data.British Journal of Psychology74, 491–516.
16.
JefferiesE.Lambon RalphM.BaddeleyA. (2004). Automatic and controlled processing in sentence recall: The role of long-term and working memory.Journal of Memory and Language51, 623–643.
17.
LundK.BurgessC. (1996). Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co-occurrence.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers28, 2203–208.
18.
MurdockB. B.Jr. (1976). Item and order information in short-term serial memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General105, 191–216.
19.
MyersJ. L.CookA. E.KambeG.MasonR. A.O'BrienE. (2000). Semantic and episodic effects on bridging inferences.Discourse Processes29, 179–200.
20.
NairneJ. S. (1990). A feature model of immediate memory.Memory and Cognition18, 251–269.
21.
NeathI. (1997). Modality, concreteness and set-size effects in a free reconstruction of order task.Memory & Cognition25, 2256–263.
22.
PoirierM.Saint-AubinJ. (1995). Memory for related and unrelated words: Further evidence on the influence of semantic factors in immediate serial recall.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology43A, 384–404.
23.
PotterM.LombardiL. (1990). Regeneration in the short-term recall of sentences.Journal of Memory & Language29, 633–654.
24.
RaynerK.KambeG.DuffyS. (2000). The effect of clause wrap-up on eye movements during reading.The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology53A, 41061–1080.
25.
RummerR.EngelkampJ. (2001). Phonological information contributes to short-term recall of auditorily presented sentences.Journal of Memory & Language45, 451–467.
26.
Saint-AubinJ.OuelletteD.PoirierM. (2005). Semantic similarity and immediate serial recall: Is there an effect on all trials?.Psychological Bulletin and Review12, 1171–177.
27.
Saint-AubinJ.PoirierM. (1999). The influence of long-term memory factors on immediate serial recall: An item and order analysis.International Journal of Psychology34, 5–6347–352.
28.
ShapiroS. I.PalermoD. (1970). Conceptual organization and class membership: Normative data for representatives of 100 categories.Psychonomic Monograph Supplements3, 11107–127.
29.
Van OverscheldeJ. P.RawsonK. A.DunloskyJ. (2006). Category norms: An updated and expanded version of the Battig and Montague (1969) norms.Journal of Memory & Language50, 3289–335.
