N250 effects for letter transpositions depend on lexicality: 'Casual' or 'causal'?

NeuroReport

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 381-387

  Duñabeitia, Jon Andoni ^a   Molinaro, Nicola ^a   Laka, Itziar ^b   Estévez, Adelina ^a   Carreiras, Manuel ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DE LA LAGUNA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF THE BASQUE COUNTRY UPV EHU   (Spain)

^c BASQUE CENTER ON COGNITION   (Spain)

Author keywords

Letter transpositions; N250; Orthographic neighbors; Visual word recognition

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN REGION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE ABILITY; LINGUISTICS; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; READING; SEMANTIC MEMORY; SEMANTICS; WORD RECOGNITION; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BRAIN; DECISION MAKING; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED RESPONSE; PHYSIOLOGY; RECOGNITION;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BRAIN; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SEMANTICS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 62449222037     PISSN: 09594965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e3283249b1c     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Grainger J. Cracking the orthographic code: an introduction. Lang Cogn Process 2008; 23:1-35.
2. Davis CJ, Bowers JS. Contrasting five theories of letter position coding. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 2006; 32:535-557.
3. Carreiras M, Perea M, Grainger J. Effects of orthographic neighborhood in visual word recognition: cross-task comparisons. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 1997; 23:857-871.
4. Grainger J, Whitney C. Does the human mind read words as a whole? Trends Cogn Sci 2004; 8:58-59.
5. Rayner K, White SJ, Johnson RL, Liversedge SP. Reading words with jumbled letters: there's a cost. Psychol Sci 2006; 17:192-193.
6. Perea M, Dunabeitia JA, Carreiras M. Transposed-letter priming effects for close versus distant transpositions. Exp Psychol 2008; 55:397-406.
7. Dunabeitia JA, Perea M, Carreiras M. Do transposed-letter similarity effects occur at a morpheme level? Evidence for morpho-orthographic decomposition. Cognition 2007; 105:691-703.
8. Perea M, Lupker SJ. Can CANISO activate CASINO? Transposed-letter similarity effects with nonadjacent letter positions. J Mem Lang 2004; 51:231-246.
9. Rumelhart DE, McClelland JL. An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: part 2. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model. Psychol Rev 1982; 89:60-94.
10. Whitney C, Lavidor M. Facultative orthographic neighborhood effects: the SERIOL model account. Cogn Psycnol 2005; 51:179-213.
11. Gómez P, Ratcliff R, Perea M. The overlap model: a model of letter position coding. Psychol Rev 2008; 115:577-601.
12. Grainger J, Granier JP, Farioli F, Van Assche E, Van Heuven W. Letter position information and printed word perception: the relative-position priming constraint. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 2006; 32:865-884.
13. Castles A, Davis C, Forster KI. Word recognition development in children: insights from masked priming. In: Kinoshita S, Lupker S, editors. Masked priming: state of the art. Hove, UK: Psychology Press; 2003. pp. 345-360.
14. Duñabeitia JA, Perea M, Carreiras M. There is no clam with coats in the calm coast: delimiting the transposed-letter priming effect. Q J Exp Psychol (in press).
15. Kinoshita S, Morris D. Transposed-letter priming of orthographic representations. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn (in press).
16. Andrews S. Lexical retrieval and selection processes: effects of transposed letter confusability. J Mem Lang 1996; 35:775-800.
17. Grainger J, Kiyonaga K, Holcomb PJ. The time course of orthographic and phonological code activation. Psychol Sci 2006; 17:1021-1026.
18. Holcomb PJ, Grainger J. On the time-course of visual word recognition: an ERP investigation using masked repetition priming. J Cogn Neurosci 2006; 18:1631-1643.
19. Holcomb PJ, Grainger J. Exploring the temporal dynamics of visual word recognition in the masked repetition priming paradigm using event-related potentials. Brain Res 2007; 1180:39-58.
20. Carreiras M, Vergara M, Perea M. ERP correlates of transposed-letter priming effects: the role of vowels vs. consonants. Psychophysiology (in press).
21. Grossi G, Coch D. Automatic word form processing in masked priming: an ERP study. Psychophysiology 2005; 42:343-355.
22. Morris J, Franck T, Grainger J, Holcomb PJ. Semantic transparency and masked morphological priming: an ERP investigation. Psychophysiology 2007; 44:506-521.
23. Greenhouse S, Geisser S. On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika 1959; 24:95-112.
24. Forster KI. Form priming with masked primes: the best-match hypothesis. In: Coltheart M, editor. Attention and performance XII. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum; 1987. pp. 127-146.