Search

• The "intention free" account of single word identification (the automatic perspective) is critically questioned. • The relation between intention and visual word identification is more nuanced than understood to date. • Using a Go/No-Go paradigm, we conducted two studies in which the proportion of GO trials varied. • Stimulus quality was the manipulated factor. • Results demonstrates when processing with prior intent occurs, and when it does not need prior intent. • We concluded that there is no fixed relation between intention and word identification. A widely held account asserts that single words are automatically identified in the absence of an intent to process them in the form of identifying a task set, and implementing it. We provide novel evidence that there is no fixed relation between intention and visual word identification. Subjects were randomly cued on a trial-by-trial basis as to whether to read aloud a single target word (Go) or not (No-go). When the Go-No Go probability was 50% (Experiment 1) the effect of stimulus quality (bright vs. dim targets) was the same size as in a separate block of 100% Go trials. In Experiment 2, where the Go-No Go probability was 80% in the cued condition, the stimulus quality effect was smaller than in the block of all Go trials. These results can be understood in terms of Go trial probability moderating whether subjects (i) hold off beginning to process the target until an intention in the form of a Task Set has been implemented, or (ii) begin to identify the target during the time taken to implement a Task Set. The additivity of stimulus quality and cueing conditions in Experiment 1 support the view that target processing only begins when a Task Set is in place, whereas the under-additivity of stimulus quality and cueing condition in Experiment 2 supports the interpretation that target identification can start during the time that a Task Set is being implemented. Taken together with other results, we conclude that there is no fixed relation between an intention and word identification; context is everything. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]