Advance planning of form properties in the written production of single and multiple words

Language and Cognitive Processes

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 555-579

  Damian, Markus F ^a   Stadthagen Gonzalez, Hans ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^b BANGOR UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Handwriting; Language production; Planning

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HANDWRITING; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; PHONETICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH ARTICULATION; VERBAL COMMUNICATION; WORD RECOGNITION; WRITTEN LANGUAGE;

EID: 70450242762     PISSN: 01690965     EISSN: 14640732     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01690960802346500     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Andrews, S. (1997). The effect of orthographic similarity on lexical retrieval: Resolving neighborhood conflicts. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4, 439-61.
2. Baayen, R.H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database (Release 2) [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania [Distributor].
3. Bonin, P., Malardier, N., Meot, A., & Fayol, M. (2006). The scope of advance planning in written picture naming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 205-237.
4. Costa, A., & Caramazza, A. (2002). The production of noun phrases in English and Spanish: implications for the scope of phonological encoding in speech production. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 178-198.
5. Damian, M. F. (2003). Articulatory duration in single word speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 29, 416-431.
6. Damian, M. F., & Dumay, N. (2007). Time pressure and phonological advance planning in spoken production. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 195-209.
7. Damian, M. F., & Dumay, N. (in press). Exploring phonological encoding through repeated segments. Language and Cognitive Processes.
8. Delattre, M., Bonin, P., & Barry, C. (2006). Written spelling to dictation: Sound-to-spelling regularity affects both writing latencies and durations. Journal of Experimental Psychology - Learning Memory and Cognition, 32, 1330-1340.
9. Dell, G. S., Juliano, C, & Govindjee, A. (1993). Structure and content in language production: A theory of frame constraints in phonological speech errors. Cognitive Science, 17, 149-195.
10. Dell, G. S., Schwartz, M. F., Martin, N., Saffran, E. M., & Gagnon, D. A. (1997). Lexical access in aphasic and nonaphasic speakers. Psychological Review, 104, 801-838.
11. Ferreira, F, & Swets, B. (2002). How incremental is language production? Evidence from the production of utterances requiring the computation of arithmetic sums. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 57-84.
12. Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: a Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 35, 116-124.
13. Fromkin, V. A. (1971). The nonanomalous nature of anomalous utterances. Language, 47, 27-52.
14. Fromkin, V. A. (1973). Introduction. In V. A. Fromkin (Ed.), Speech errors as linguistic evidence (pp. 11-5). The Hague: Mouton.
15. Griffin, Z. M. (2004). Why look? Reasons for eye movements related to language production. In J. M. Henderson & F Ferreira (Eds.), The interface of language, vision, and action (pp. 213-247). New York: Psychology Press.
16. Hotopf, N. (1980). Slips of the pen. In U. Frith (Ed.), Cognitive processes in spelling (pp. 287-307). London: Academic Press.
17. Houghton, G, & Zorzi, M. (2003). Normal and impaired spelling in a connectionist dual-route architecture. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20(2), 115-162.
18. Jordan, M. I. (1990). Motor learning and the degrees of freedom problem. In M. Jeannerod (Ed.), Attention and performance (Vol. XIII, pp. 796-836): Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19. Kandel, S., Alvarez, C. J., & Vallee, N. (2006). Syllables as processing units in handwriting production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 18-31.
20. Kello, C. T., Plaut, D. C., & MacWhinney, B. (2000). The task-dependence of staged vs. cascaded processing: An empirical and computational study of Stroop interference in speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 340-361.
21. Korvorst, M., Roelofs, A., & Levelt, W. J. M. (2006). Incrementality in naming and reading complex numerals: Evidence from eyetracking. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 296-311.
22. Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. Levelt, W.J.M, Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1-75.
24. Levelt, W. J. M., & Wheeldon, L. (1994). Do speakers have access to a mental syllabary? Cognition, 50, 122-142.
25. MacKay, D. G. (1987). The organization of perception and action: A theory for language and other cognitive skills. New York: Springer.
26. Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Tyler, L. K. (1980). The temporal structure of spoken language understanding. Cognition, 8, 1-71.
27. McClelland, J. L. (1979). On the time relations of mental processes: An examination of systems of processes in cascade. Psychological Review, 86, 287-330.
28. Meyer, A. S. (1990). The time course of phonological encoding in language production: The encoding of successive syllables. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 524-545.
29. Meyer, A. S. (1991). The time course of phonological encoding in language production: phonological encoding inside a syllable. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 69-89.
30. Meyer, A. S. (1996). Lexical access in phrase and sentence production: Results from picture-word interference experiments. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 477-96.
31. Meyer, A. (2004). The use of eye tracking in studies of sentence generation. In J. M. Henderson & F. Ferreira (Eds.), The interface of language, vision, and action (pp. 191-211). New York: Psychology Press.
32. Meyer, A. S., Roelofs, A., & Levelt, W. J. M. (2003). Word length effects in object naming: The role of a response criterion. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 131-147.
33. Meyer, A. S., Sleiderink, A. M., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1998). Viewing and naming objects: Eye movements during noun phrase production. Cognition, 66, B25-B33.
34. Pinker, S., & Bloom, P. (1990). Natural language and natural selection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13, 707-784.
35. Posnansky, C. J., & Rayner, K. (1977). Visual-feature and response components in a picture-word interference task with beginning and skilled readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 24, 440-449.
36. Roelofs, A. (1997). The WEAVER model of word-form encoding in speech production. Cognition, 64, 249-284.
37. Roelofs, A. (1999). Phonological segments and features as planning units in speech production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 173-200.
38. Roelofs, A., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1996). Interaction between semantic and orthographic factors in conceptually driven naming: Comment on Starreveld and La Heij. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 246-251.
39. Schnur, T. T., Costa, A., & Caramazza, A. (2006). Planning at the phonological level during sentence production. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35, 189-213.
40. Schriefers, H., de Ruiter, J. P., & Steigerwald, M. (1999). Parallelism in the production of noun phrases: Experiments and reaction time models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 25, 702-720.
41. Schriefers, H., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1990). Exploring the time course of lexical access in language production: Picture-word interference studies. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 86-102.
42. Schriefers, H., & Teruel, E. (1999). Phonological facilitation in the production of two-word utterances. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 11, 17-50.
43. Starreveld, P. A. (2000). On the interpretation of onsets of auditory context effects in word production. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 497-525.
44. Sternberg, S. (1998). Discovering mental processing stages: The method of additive factors. In D. Scarborough & D. N. Osherson (Eds.), An invitation to cognitive science, Volume 4: Methods, models, and conceptual issues (pp. 703-863). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
45. Van Galen, G. P. (1991). Handwriting: Issues for a psychomotor theory. Human Movement Science, 10, 165-191.
46. Van Galen, G. P., Meulenbroek, R. G., & Hylkema, H. (1986). On the simultaneous processing of words, letters and strokes in handwriting: Evidence for a mixed linear and parallel model. In H. S. R. Kao, G P. V Galen, & R. Hoosain (Eds.), Graphonomics: Contemporary research in handwriting (pp. 5-20). Amsterdam: North Holland.
47. Wheeldon, L., & Lahiri, A. (1997). Prosodic units in speech production. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 356-381.
48. Zesiger, P., Orliaguet, J. P., Boë, L. J., & Mounoud, P. (1994). The influence of syllabic structure in handwriting and typing production. In G Keuss, C. Faure, G Lorette, & A. Vinter (Eds.), Advances in handwriting: A multidisciplinary approach (pp. 389-01). Paris: Europia.