Orthographic contributions to perceived word center

Brain and Language

Volumn 88, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 321-330

  Fischer, Martin H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Graphemes; Letter font; Letter size; Lexical access; Perceived word center; Phonemes; Word bisection

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BINOCULAR CONVERGENCE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; MENTAL TASK; NORMAL HUMAN; OBSERVER VARIATION; PHONEME; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL STIMULATION; WORD RECOGNITION; WRITING;

EID: 1142309640     PISSN: 0093934X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00163-9     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Aglioti S., Goodale M.A., DeSouza J.F.X. Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand. Current Biology. 5:1995;679-685.
2. Besner D. Phonology, lexical access in reading, and articulatory suppression: A critical review. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A. 39:1987;467-478.
3. Besner D., Davies J., Daniels S. Reading for meaning: The effects of concurrent articulation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A. 33:1981;415-437.
4. Brysbaert M., Vitu F., Schroyens W. The right visual field advantage and the optimal viewing position effect: On the relation between foveal and parafoveal word recognition. Neuropsychology. 10:1996;385-395.
5. Clark J.J., O'Regan J.K. Word ambiguity and the optimal viewing position in reading. Vision Research. 39:1999;843-857.
6. Coltheart M., Curtis B., Atkins P., Haller M. Models of reading aloud: Dual-route and parallel-distributed-processing approaches. Psychological Review. 100:1993;589-608.
7. Ducrot S., Pynte J. What determines the eyes' landing position in words? Perception and Psychophysics. 64:2002;1130-1144.
8. Fischer M.H. Bisection performance indicates spatial word representation. Cognitive Brain Research. 4:1996;163-170.
9. Fischer M.H. Word center is misperceived. Perception. 29:2000;337-354.
10. Fischer M.H. Perceiving spatial attributes of print. Kennedy A., Radach R., Heller D., Pynte J. Reading as a perceptual process. 2000;89-117 Elsevier, Amsterdam.
11. Fischer M.H. How sensitive is hand transport to illusory context effects? Experimental Brain Research. 136:2001;224-230.
12. Fischer, M. H., Bertram, R., Hyönä, J. (2003). Precision of midpoint localization in lexical and non-lexical visual stimuli. Submitted.
13. Fischer M.H., Ziegler W., Kerkhoff G., Weger U. Does word bisection reveal spared phonological processing in aphasic patients? Journal of Neurolinguistics. 13:2000;241-244.
14. Goodale M.A., Milner A.D., Jakobson L.S., Carey D.P. A neurological dissociation between perceiving objects and grasping them. Nature. 349:1991;154-156.
15. Heilman K.M., Watson R.T., Valenstein E. Neglect and related disorders. Heilman K.M., Valenstein E. Clinical neuropsychology. 1985;243-293 Oxford University Press, Oxford.
16. Jewell G., McCourt M.E. Pseudoneglect: A review and meta-analysis of performance factors in line bisection tasks. Neuropsychologia. 38:2000;93-110.
17. Jones D., Farrand P., Stuart G., Morris N. Functional equivalence of verbal and spatial information in serial short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 21:1995;1008-1018.
18. Kleiman G.M. Speech recoding in reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 14:1975;323-339.
19. Lavidor M., Babkoff H., Faust M. Analysis of standard and non-standard visual word format in the two hemispheres. Neuropsychologia. 39:2001;430-439.
20. Luckiesh M. Visual illusions: Their causes, characteristics, and applications. 1922/1965;Dover, New York.
21. Lukatela G., Turvey M.T. Phonological access of the lexicon: Evidence from associative priming with pseudohomophones. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 17:1991;951-966.
22. Milner A.D., Goodale M.A. The visual brain in action. 1995;Oxford University Press, New York.
23. Milner A.D., Harvey M. Distortions of size perception in visuospatial neglect. Current Biology. 5:1995;85-89.
24. Milner A.D., Harvey M., Roberts R.C., Forster S.V. Line bisection errors in visual neglect: Misguided action or size distortion? Neuropsychologia. 31:1993;39-49.
25. O'Regan J.K. Eye movements and reading. Kowler E. Eye movements and their role in visual and cognitive processes. 1990;395-453 Elsevier, Amsterdam.
26. O'Regan J.K., Jacobs A.M. Optimal viewing position effect in word recognition: A challenge to current theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 18:1992;185-197.
27. Paap K.R., Newsome S.L., McDonald J.E., Schvaneveldt R.W. An activation-verification model for letter and word recognition: The word-superiority effect. Psychological Review. 89:1982;573-594.
28. Paulesu E., Demonet J.F., Fazio F., McCrory E., Chanoine V., Brunswick N., Cappa S.F., Cossu G., Habib M., Frith C.D., Frith U. Dyslexia: Cultural diversity and biological unity. Science. 291(5511):2001;2165-2167.
29. Rayner K. Eye guidance in reading: Fixation locations in words. Perception. 8:1979;21-30.
30. Saito S. When articulatory suppression does not suppress the activity of the phonological loop. British Journal of Psychology. 88:1997;565-578.
31. Shillcock R., Ellison T.M., Monaghan P. Eye-fixation behavior, lexical storage, and visual word recognition in a split processing model. Psychological Review. 107(4):2000;824-851.
32. Ungerleider L.G., Mishkin M. Two cortical visual systems. Ingle D.J., Goodale M.A., Mansfield R.J.W. Analysis of visual behavior. 1982;548-586 MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.