Orthographically mediated inhibition effects: Evidence of activational feedback during visual word recognition

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 102-110

  Reimer, Jason F ^a,b   Brown, Joseph S ^a   Lorsbach, Thomas C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA AT OMAHA   (United States)

^b BOYS TOWN NATIONAL RESEARCH HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; FEMALE; HUMAN; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); LEARNING; MALE; PAIRED ASSOCIATE LEARNING; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHONETICS; PSYCHOPHYSICS; READING; SEMANTICS;

ADULT; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; ATTENTION; FEEDBACK; FEMALE; HUMANS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; PAIRED-ASSOCIATE LEARNING; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHONETICS; PSYCHOPHYSICS; READING; SEMANTICS;

EID: 0035287714     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03196145     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. BALOTA, D. A., & LORCH, R. (1986). Depth of automatic spreading activation: Mediated priming effects in pronunciation but not in lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 12, 336-345.
2. BECKER, C. A. (1979). Semantic context and word frequency effects in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 5, 252-259.
3. BECKER, C. A. (1985). What do we really know about context effects? In D. Besner, T. G. Waller, & E. M. MacKinnon (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (pp. 125-166). San Diego: Academic Press.
4. BECKER, C. A., & KILLION, T. H. (1977). Interaction of visual and cognitive effects in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 3, 389-401.
5. BESNER, D., & SMITH, M. C. (1992). Models of visual word recognition: When obscuring the stimulus yields a clearer view. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 468-482.
6. BOROWSKY, R., & BESNER, D. (1993). Visual word recognition: A multistage activation model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 19, 813-840.
7. COLLINS, A. M., & LOFTUS, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407-428.
8. COLOMBO, L. (1986). Activation and inhibition with orthographically similar words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 12, 226-324.
9. COLTHEART, M., CURTIS, B., ATKINS, P., & HALLER, M. (1993). Models of reading aloud: Dual-route and parallel-distributed-processing approaches. Psychological Review, 100, 589-608.
10. DEN HEYER, K. (1985). On the nature of the proportion effect in semantic priming. Acta Psychologica, 61, 17-36.
11. FROST, R. (1998). Toward a strong phonological theory of visual word recognition: True issues and false trails. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 71-99.
12. GRAINGER, J. (1990). Word frequency and neighborhood frequency effects in lexical decision and naming. Journal of Memory & Language, 29, 228-244.
13. GRAINGER, J., & JACOBS, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review, 103, 518-565.
14. KEEFE, D. E., & NEELY, J. H. (1990). Semantic priming in the pronunciation task: The role of prospective prime-generated expectancies. Memory & Cognition, 18, 289-298.
15. KEPPEL, G., & STRAND, B. Z. (1970). Free-association responses to the primary purposes and other responses selected from the Palmero-Jenkins norms. In L. Postman & G. Keppel (Eds.), Norms of word associations (pp. 177-240). New York: Academic Press.
16. LAXON, V. J., MASTERSON, J., POOL, M., & KEATING, C. (1992). Non-word naming: Further exploration of the pseudohomophone effect in terms of orthographic neighborhood size, graphemic changes, spelling-sound consistency, and reader accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 730-748.
17. LUKATELA, G., & TURVEY, M. T. (1994a). Visual lexical access is initially phonological: 1. Evidence from associative priming by words, homophones, and pseudohomophones. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 107-128.
18. LUKATELA, G., & TURVEY, M. T. (1994b). Visual lexical access is initially phonological: 2. Evidence from phonological priming by homophones and pseudohomophones. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 331-353.
19. MARSHALL, G. R., & COFER, C. N. (1970). Single-word free-association norms for 328 responses from the Connecticut cultural norms for verbal items in categories. In L. Postman & G. Keppel (Eds.), Norms of word associations (pp. 177-240). New York: Academic Press.
20. MCCLELLAND, J. L. (1987). The case for interactionism in language processing. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 3-35). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. MCCLELLAND, J. L. & RUMELHART, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407.
22. MCNAMARA, T. P., & HEALY, A. F. (1988). Semantic, phonological, and mediated priming in reading and lexical decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 398-409.
23. MORTON, J. (1969). Interaction of information in word recognition. Psychological Review, 76, 165-178.
24. MORTON, J. (1982). Disintegrating the lexicon: An information processing approach. In J. Mehler, E. C. T. Walker, & M. Garrett (Eds.), Perspectives on mental representation (pp. 89-109). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. NEELY, J. H. (1977). Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory: Role of inhibitionless spreading activation and limited-capacity attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 106, 226-254.
26. O'SEAGHDHA, P. G., & MARIN, J. W. (1997). Mediated semantic-phonological priming: Calling distant relatives. Journal of Memory & Language, 36, 226-252.
27. PAAP, K. R., MCDONALD, J. E., SCHVANEVELDT, R. W., & NOEL, R. W. (1987). Frequency and pronounceability in visually presented naming and lexical decision tasks. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 221-243). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
28. PAAP, K. R., NEWSOME, S. L., MCDONALD, J. E., & SCHVANEVELDT, R. W. (1982). An activation-verification model for letter and word recognition: The word-superiority effect. Psychological Review, 89, 573-594.
29. PALMERO, D. S., & JENKINS, J. J. (1964). Word association norms: Grade school through college. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
30. RUMELHART, D. E., & MCCLELLAND, J. L. (1982). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: II. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model. Psychological Review, 89, 60-94.
31. SCHNEIDER, W. (1988). Micro Experimental Laboratory: An integrated system for IBM-PC compatibles. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 20, 206-217.
32. SCHNEIDER, W. (1990). MEL user's guide: Computer techniques for real time experimentation. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools.
33. STOLZ, J. A., & BESNER, D. (1996). Role of set in visual word recognition: Activation and activation blocking as nonautomatic processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, 1166-1177.
34. STOLZ, J. A., & NEELY, J. H. (1995). When target degradation does and does not enhance semantic context effects in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 596-611.