Abstract
Simple name-retrieval models of spoken word planning (Bloem & La Heij, 2003; Starreveld & La Heij, 1996) maintain (1) that there are two levels in word planning, a conceptual and a lexical phonological level, and (2) that planning a word in both object naming and oral reading involves the selection of a lexical phonological representation. Here, the name retrieval models are compared to more complex models with respect to their ability to account for relevant data. It appears that the name retrieval models cannot easily account for several relevant findings, including some speech error biases, types of morpheme errors, and context effects on the latencies of responding to pictures and words. New analyses of the latency distributions in previous studies also pose a challenge. More complex models account for all these findings. It is concluded that the name retrieval models are too simple and that the greater complexity of the other models is warranted.
