Skip to content

Semantic interpretability does not influence masked priming effects

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Original languageEnglish
JournalQuarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Early online date7 Dec 2019
DateAccepted/In press - 24 Nov 2019
DateE-pub ahead of print - 7 Dec 2019
DatePublished (current) - 11 Jan 2020


Much of the recent masked nonword priming literature demonstrates no difference in priming between affixed and non-affixed nonword primes (e.g., maskity-MASK vs maskondMASK). A possible explanation for the absence of a difference is that studies have used affixed primes which were semantically uninterpretable (Heathcote, Nation, Castles, & Beyersmann, 2017). Therefore, this explanation indicates semantic interpretability plays a fundamental role inmasked priming. To test this account, we conducted an experiment using the masked priming paradigm in the lexical decision task. We compared responses to targets which were preceded by one of four primes types: 1) interpretable affixed nonwords (e.g. maskless-MASK), 2) uninterpretable affixed nonwords (e.g. maskity-MASK), 3) non-affixed nonwords (e.g., maskondMASK) and 4) unrelated words (e.g. tubeful-MASK). Our results follow the trend of finding nodifference between affixed and non-affixed primes. Critically, however, we observed no difference in priming between uninterpretable and interpretable affixed primes. Thus, our results suggest that semantic interpretability does not influence masked priming.

    Research areas

  • semantic interpretability, masked priming, morphological processing, visual word recognition, lexical decision

    Structured keywords

  • Language
  • Cognitive Science

Download statistics

No data available



  • Full-text PDF (author’s accepted manuscript)

    Rights statement: This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via SAGE Publications at [insert hyperlink] . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.

    Accepted author manuscript, 604 KB, PDF document


View research connections

Related faculties, schools or groups