{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028368794326241134, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02127659574468085, 'mean_word_length': 5.292993630573249, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Repetition in visual word identification: Benefits and costs

University students performed lexical tasks with visually presented target words after the presentation of an identical or unrelated prime, at short (80–120 ms) or longer (410–710 ms) prime–target stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs). Experiment 1 showed perceptual identification benefits in vocal responding at a short SOA that were reduced (accuracy) or reversed (latency) at a longer SOA. Experiment 2 showed a transition from a repetition benefit to a cost over 3 SOAs in a target-masked version of the lexical decision task (LDT; target displayed for only 141 ms). In Experiment 3 the repetition cost was replicated at a 530-ms SOA in the LDT with masked targets, but a repetition benefit was observed in the conventional LDT (target displayed until response). The dependence of repetition costs on target masking is more consistent with biases based on episodic confusions than refractoriness of lexical representations.