Word Face Associations Experiment

Back to Instructor's Page

Introduction
Method
-Materials
-Procedure


Introduction

The purpose of this experiment is to see if category length influences hit and false alarm rates in the same way for both words and faces.  It is well known that as the length of a study list (or category list in this experiment) increases, both the hit and false alarm rates (to non studied category members, called related distractors) increase.  For unknown stimuli, such as novel faces used here, there is no data but predictions of various quantitative models of memory.  Most models predict no difference between familiar and novel items.  A previous version of this experiment showed similar results for both words and faces.  The only difference between the previous and current version of the experiment are the face categories.  The previous categories were made from a homogenous population (i.e. young Caucasian yearbook pictures) and the current categories include various race and age groups.  An unpublished manuscript of the initial experiment can be found here.
« Return to Top»

Method

Materials
        Words and faces made up the stimuli.  There were 18 categories of words, a subset of those used by Shiffrin, Huber and Marinelli (1995): nine categories were related by semantic similarity and nine categories were related by orthographic-phonemic similarity.  Each word category consisted of one prototype word and 11 exemplars.  The semantic categories consisted of relatively long words of low frequency, each with a semantic link to the prototype word (e.g. prototype: dinosaur; exemplars: fossils, extinction, reptiles, swamps, glaciers, skeletons, brontosaurus, amphibians, mammoth, geology, artifacts).  Orthographic-phonemic categories consisted of three- or four-letter high frequency words that shared a vowel sound and exactly one consonant cluster with the prototype word (e.g. prototype: sip; exemplars: tip, lip, hip, sis, sin, sit, dip, rip, six, nip, pip).  There were 30 extra semantic words and 20 extra orthographic-phonemic words, with no obvious relation to any of the categories.
        There were 9 categories of female faces and 9 categories of male faces, each consisting of 12 perceptually similar exemplars, as judged by the author.  There were 20 extra female faces and 20 extra male faces, chosen not to be similar to any of the categories (called unrelated distractors).  The faces were black and white photographic quality with similar backgrounds, selected primarily from college yearbooks and from the Olivetti Research Database of Faces (AT&T Laboratories, 1994).  Each face was standardized so that the head orientation, level of the eyes, and position of the chin were identical and there was very little (if any) background.  My labels for the categories are as follows.  Female: old age, middle age, young blonde straight hair, young blonde curly hair, young brown curly hair, young brown straight hair, Asian American, African American, and Indian American.  Male:  old age, middle age, young blonde hair, young with mustaches, young brown hair, young receding hairlines, Asian American, African American, Indian American.  The extra faces came from categories above, but they all wore glasses.

Procedure
        Incidental Study Session.
        Participants were told that the study was designed to investigate how people relate faces with words in advertisements; they were not informed that a memory test would follow.  On each study trial, one word appeared directly above one face in the center of the screen for 2.5 s; participants judged the word-face association by using the mouse to click a number on a 5-point scale.  The study session began and ended with 10 buffer trials.  The buffer words were randomly chosen from the extra semantic words and of the buffer faces, five were randomly chosen from each of the extra female and extra male lists.
        For each participant, categories were randomly assigned lengths of two, six, or nine such that there were three categories of female faces, male faces, semantic words, and orthographic-phonemic words assigned to each length.  The category prototypes were not presented during study.  The experimental study combinations were random pairings of faces with words, and the order of presentation was random with respect to category membership.
         Test Session.
        The test session began with an explanation of the memory test to follow.  The test session consisted of two blocks, one block each of 104 trials of single words or single faces with the order of the blocks and presentation of items within blocks randomized for each participant.  On each trial, a single face or word appeared until the participant answered the following two questions.  First, the participants was asked to chose a number on a 6-point scale, indicating their confidence that the exact item had appeared during the study session (1= no confidence, 2= very little, 3= little, 4= moderate, 5= high, 6= very high).  The second question asked the participants to use the keypad to give their best estimate of the number of items on the study list that were similar to the test item in appearance, sound, spelling, or meaning, including the test item itself, if it had been studied.
        Each test block began with four buffer items chosen from the remaining extra items.  The buffer items were two female and two male faces for the face block, and four extra semantic words for the word block.
        For each word category, the prototype, two studied words, and two non studied words were tested.  The test block also included six of the remaining extra semantic words and four of the extra orthographic-phonemic words.  For each face category, two studied faces and three non studied faces were tested.  The test block also included five of the extra male faces, and five of the extra female faces.  After the buffer items, the test items within block were presented in random order.
« Return to Top»


Last revised:June 03, 2003 11:46:58 AM
Copyright© 1995 The University of Mississippi. All rights reserved.
Questions about this page?PsychExps