Search

Research on noun-noun combinations has been largely focusing on concrete concepts. Three experiments examined the role of concept abstractness in the representation of noun-noun combinations. In Experiment 1, participants provided written interpretations for phrases constituted by nouns of varying degrees of abstractness. Interpretive focus (the modifier, the head noun, or both) for each noun-noun phrase was evaluated. In Experiment 2, a different group of participants directly indicated which noun, the modifier or the head noun, was the focus of the meaning of each noun-noun phrase. Finally, participants in Experiment 3 assessed similarity of noun-noun phrases with overlapping modifiers. If abstractness of constituent nouns affects information distribution between modifier and head noun, it would accordingly affect similarity ratings for noun-noun phrases with overlapping modifiers. Results showed that the pattern of information distribution within a noun-noun phrase differed between phrases with abstract head nouns and phrases with concrete head nouns. Specifically, the center of representation was more on the head noun side for phrases with concrete head nouns, whereas the center seemed to shift to the direction of the modifier for phrases with abstract head nouns. Some issues related to effects of concept abstractness on noun-noun combinations are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human similarity judgments do not reliably conform to the predictions of leading theories of psychological similarity. Evidence from the triad similarity judgment task shows that people often identify thematic associates like dog and bone as more similar than taxonomic category members like dog and cat , even though thematic associates lack the type of featural or relational similarity that is foundational to theories of psychological similarity. This specific failure to predict human behavior has been addressed as a consequence of education and other individual differences, an artifact of the triad similarity judgment paradigm, or a shortcoming in psychological accounts of similarity. We investigated the judged similarity of semantically-related concepts (taxonomic category members and thematic associates) as it relates to other task-independent measures of semantic knowledge and access. Participants were assessed on reading and language ability, then event-related potentials (ERPs) were collected during a passive, sequential word reading task that presented pseudowords and taxonomically-related, thematically-related, and unrelated word sequences, and, finally, similarity judgments were collected with the classic two-alternative forced-choice triad task. The results uncovered a correspondence between ERP amplitude and triad-based similarity judgments—similarity judgment behavior reliably predicts ERP amplitude during passive word reading, absent of any instruction to consider similarity. It was also found that individual differences in reading and language ability independently predicted ERP amplitude. This evidence suggests that similarity judgments are driven by reliable patterns of thought that are not solely rooted in the interpretation of task goals or reading and language ability. • Similarity judgments in the classic, two-alternative forced choice triad task predict N400 amplitude differences during naive word reading. • Taxonomic category members produce reliably different N400 activation patterns as compared to thematic associates and unrelated words. • Reading and language ability predict unique variance in N400 amplitude for taxonomic category members and thematic associates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]