Pseudoword context effects on letter perception: The role of word misperception

European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 17, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 289-318

  Grainger, Jonathan ^a,c   Jacobs, Arthur M ^b  

^a AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITY   (France)

^b FREIE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

^c AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; NORMAL HUMAN; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGIC TEST; STIMULUS RESPONSE; THEORETICAL MODEL; WORD RECOGNITION;

EID: 18844415577     PISSN: 09541446     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/9541440440000131     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Baron, J., & Thurston, I. (1973). An analysis of the word superiority effect. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 207-228.
2. Carr, T. H. (1986). Perceiving visual language. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance (pp. 29.1-29.82). New York: Wiley.
3. Carr, T. H., Davidson, B. J., & Hawkins, H. L. (1978). Perceptual flexibility in word recognition: Strategies affect orthographic computation but not lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4, 674-690.
4. Carr, T. H., & Pollatsek, A. (1985). Recognizing printed words: A look at current models. In D. Besner, J. G. Waller, & G. E. MacKinnon (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (Vol. 5, pp. 1-82). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
5. Carreiras, M., Perea, M., & Grainger, J. (1997). Effects of orthographic neighborhood in visual word recognition: Cross-task comparisons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 857-871.
6. Cattell, J. M. (1886). The time it takes to see and name objects. Mind, 11, 53-65.
7. Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, J. T., & Besner, D. (1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornič (Ed.), Attention and performance VI. London: Academic Press.
8. Estes, W. K., & Brunn, J. L. (1987). Discriminability and bias in the word-superiority effect. Perception and Psychophysics, 42, 411-422.
9. Grainger, J. (1990). Word frequency and neighborhood frequency effects in lexical decision and naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 228-244.
10. Grainger, J., Bouttevin, S., Truc, C., Bastien, M., & Ziegler, J. C. (2003). Word superiority, pseudoword superiority, and learning to read: A comparison of dyslexic and normal readers. Brain and Language, 87, 432-440.
11. Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1994). A dual read-out model of word context effects in letter perception: Further investigations of the word superiority effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 1158-1176.
12. Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review, 103, 518-565.
13. Grainger, J., O'Regan, K., Jacobs, A., & Segui, J. (1989). On the role of competing word units in visual word recognition: The neighborhood frequency effect. Perception and Psychophysics, 45, 189-195.
14. Grainger, J., & Segui, J. (1990). Neighborhood frequency effects in visual word recognition: A comparison of lexical decision and masked identification latencies. Perception and Psychophysics, 47, 191-198.
15. Henderson, L. (1982). Orthography and word recognition in reading. London: Academic Press.
16. Hildebrandt, N., Caplan, D., Sokol, S., & Torreano, L. (1995). Lexical factors in the word-superiority effect. Memory and Cognition, 23, 23-33.
17. Hooper, D. A., & Paap, K. R. (1997). The use of assembled phonology during performance of a letter recognition task and its dependence on the presence and proportion of word stimuli. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 167-189.
18. Imbs, P. (1971). Etudes statistiques sur le vocabulaire français. Dictionnaire des fréquences. Vocabulaire littéraire des XIXe et XXe siècles. Centre de recherche pour un tr̀sor de la langue française (CNRS) Nancy. Paris: Librairie Marcel Didier.
19. Jacobs, A. M., & Grainger, J. (1992). Testing a semistochastic variant of the interactive activation model in different word recognition experiments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 1174-1188.
20. Jacobs, A. M., Rey, A., Ziegler, J. C., & Grainger, J. (1998). MROM-p: An interactive activation, multiple read-out model of orthographic and phonological processes in visual word recognition. In J. Grainger & A. M. Jacobs (Eds.), Localist connectionist approaches to human cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
21. Johnston, J. C. (1978). A test of the sophisticated guessing theory of word perception. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 123-153.
22. Luce, R. D. (1959). Individual choice behavior. New York: Wiley.
23. Maris, E. (2002). The role of orthographic and phonological codes in the word and the pseudoword superiority effect: An analysis by means of multinomial processing tree models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 1409-1431.
24. Massaro, D. W., & Cohen, M. M. (1994). Visual, orthographic, phonological, and lexical influences in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 1107-1128.
25. McClelland, J. L., & Johnston, J. C. (1977). The role of familiar units in perception of words and nonwords. Perception and Psychophysics, 22, 249-261.
26. McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407.
27. Paap, K., Chun, E., & Vonnahme, P. (1999). Discrete threshold versus continuous strength models of perceptual recognition. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53, 277-293.
28. Paap, K., Johansen, L. S., Chun, E., & Vonnahme, P. (2000). Neighborhood frequency does affect performance in the Reicher task: Encoding or decision? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1691-1720.
29. Paap, K., 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.
30. Prinzmetal, W. (1992). The word-superiority effect does not require a T-scope. Perception and Psychophysics, 51, 473-483.
31. Reicher, G. M. (1969). Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 274-280.
32. Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1982). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part II. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model. Psychological Review, 89, 60-94.
33. Snodgrass, J. G., & Mintzer, M. (1993). Neighborhood effects in visual word recognition: Facilitatory or inhibitory? Memory and Cognition, 21, 247-266.
34. Wheeler, D. D. (1970). Processes in word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 1, 59-85.
35. Ziegler, J. C., & Jacobs, A. M. (1995). Phonological information provides early sources of constraint in the processing of letter strings. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 567-593.
36. Ziegler, J. C., Montant, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (1997). The feedback consistency effect in lexical decision and naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 533-554.
37. Ziegler, J. C., van Orden, G. C., & Jacobs, A. M. (1997). Phonology can help or hurt the perception of print. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 845-860.