TrialDataHomographs

Abstract

The dataset consists of the trial by trials data (items and responses) for each of three experiments. Participants learned to associate target words with cue words in the corrective feedback paradigm. Guessing the target from the cue was compared with reading cue-target pairs as a study method. Participants were asked to recall the target given the cue word. In all experiments cues were homographs (e.g., bank) and the targets were in the typical sense (money) or the less typical sense (river). In Experiments 1 and 2 the benefit of guessing was greater for targets in the typical sense. In Experiment 3 all targets were in the typical sense, and prime phrases preceding the cue biased the typical vs. atypical meaning of the cue. When guesses were compatible with the prime, accuracy at test was higher for typical meanings. The results do not support the idea that surprising feedback is better encoded.