A rose by any other name is still a rose: A reinterpretation of Hantsch and M\ue4debach

The Response Exclusion Hypothesis localises the semantic interference effect as observed in the pictureword paradigm at a postlexical level of processing. An important aspect of this proposal is that the ease with which distractor words can be excluded from production at the response level is determined by the degree to which they satisfy criteria demanded of a correct response. This proposal predicts that naming a picture of a \u2018\u2018rose\u2019\u2019 with the response \u2018\u2018flower\u2019\u2019 will be slower with the distractor \u2018\u2018rose\u2019\u2019 than a distractor word that would not be appropriate for the picture (e.g., \u2018\u2018tulip\u2019\u2019). Hantsch and Ma\ua8debach report evidence consistent with this expectation; however, the authors argue that the results are problematic for the Response Exclusion Hypothesis. Here we unpack Hantsch and Ma\ua8debach\u2019s arguments about why their finding is (putatively) problematic for the Response Exclusion Hypothesis. We conclude that the pattern of effects that the authors report are not only in line with what would be expected by the Response Exclusion Hypothesis, but are difficult to reconcile with Hantsch and Ma\ua8debach\u2019s preferred theoretical position