Intentional Naming

Subjects were run individually with the experimenter observing the performance of each subject. The experimenter, though in the same room with the subject, was positioned several feet behind the participant and outside of the subject's field of vision. All subjects completed three conditions, in which, upon being presented with an object or cue, subjects indicated if they subvocalized the name of the object. One condition replicates previous research in regards to the nature of subvocalizing and served as a baseline, whereas the other two conditions involved an extended refresh component. In the basic form of the task (For the baseline), subjects are introduced to the Reflexive Imagery Task (RIT), in which subjects are instructed to not subvocalize …show more content…
For the Intentional Naming condition, participants were instructed: "You will be shown a series of images. Following the image will be a fixation cross, and then an empty dot. When you are presented with the empty dot, think of the name of the object that was presented moments ago (that is, the object that was presented during the earlier part of the trial). When you think of the name of the object that was presented previously, then press the space bar." For the Unintentional Naming condition, participants were instructed: "You will be shown a series of images. Following the image will be a fixation cross, and then a dot. When you are presented with the dot, do NOT think of the name of the object that was presented moments ago (that is, the object that was presented during the earlier part of the trial). However, if you do think of the name of the object that was presented previously, then press the space bar." The trials of both refresh conditions unfolded in a fashion identical to the basic version of the task except for the following. After the presentation of the object (4 s) was a fixation-cross in the center of the screen for 6 s, which then proceeded to either an empty or filled dot for the Intentional Naming or Unintentional Naming conditions, respectively. We chose two target cues that were similar in nature but …show more content…
Since asking subjects whether they could identify the object that appeared during the trial would have increased the experimental demand to subvocalize the names of objects on the subsequent trials, we implemented a screening form at the end of the study to determine if subjects did not know or were unsure of the name. The information gathered from the funneled debriefing form revealed that it was unnecessary to exclude any trial data from