Parafoveal processing of transposed-letter words and nonwords: Evidence against parafoveal lexical activation

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 191-212

  Johnson, Rebecca L ^a   Dunne, Maxine D ^a  

^a SKIDMORE COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Eyetracking; Parafoveal processing; Reading; Transposed letter neighbors

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EYE FIXATION; EYE MOVEMENT; HUMAN; LINGUISTICS; METHODOLOGY; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; READING; RETINA FOVEA;

ADULT; EYE MOVEMENTS; FIXATION, OCULAR; FOVEA CENTRALIS; HUMANS; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; READING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84862659470     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0025983     Document Type: Article

References (110)

1. Acha, J., & Perea, M. (2008). The effect of neighborhood frequency in reading: Evidence with transposed-letter neighbors. Cognition, 108, 290-300. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.02.006
2. Altarriba, J., Kambe, G., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2001). Semantic codes are not used in integrating information across eye fixations in reading: Evidence from fluent Spanish-English bilinguals. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 875-890. doi:10.3758/BF03194444
3. Andrews, S. (1996). Lexical retrieval and selection processes: Effects of tra nsposed-letter confusability. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 775-800. doi:10.1006/jmla.1996.0040
4. Ashby, J., & Rayner, K. (2004). Representing syllable information during silent reading: Evidence from eye movements. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 391-426. doi:10.1080/01690960344000233
5. Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database (CDROM). Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.
6. Balota, D. A., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1985). The interaction of contextual constraints and parafoveal visual information in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 364-390. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(85)90013-1
7. Bijeljiac-Babic, R., Biardeau, A., & Grainger, J. (1997). Masked orthographic priming in bilingual word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 25, 447-457. doi:10.3758/BF03201121
8. Borowsky, R., & Besner, D. (1993). Visual word recognition: A multistage activation model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 813-840. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.19.4.813
9. Briihl, D., & Inhoff, A. W. (1995). Integrating information across fixations during reading: The use of orthographic bodies and of exterior letters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 55-67. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.21.1.55
10. Brown, M., Stolz, J. A., & Besner, D. (2006). Dissociative effects of stimulus quality on semantic and morphological contexts in visual word recognition. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 190-199. doi:10.1037/cjep2006018
11. Bruner, J. S., & O'Dowd, D. (1958). A note on the informativeness of parts of words. Language and Speech, 1, 98-101. doi:10.1177/002383095800100203
12. Brysbaert, M., Lange, M., & Van Wijnendaele, I. (2000). The effects of age-of-acquisition and frequency-of-occurrence in visual word recognition: Lexical or semantic? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 12, 65-85. doi:10.1080/095414400382208
13. Carr, T. H., Mccauley, C., Sperber, R. D., & Parmalee, C. M. (1982). Words, pictures, and priming: On semantic activation and the automaticity of information processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 757-777. doi:10.1037/00961523.8.6.757
14. Chambers, S. M. (1979). Letter and order information in lexical access. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 18, 225-241. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90136-1
15. Christianson, K., Johnson, R. L., & Rayner, K. (2005). Letter transpositions within and across morphemes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1327-1339. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.31.6.1327
16. Davis, C. J. (1999). The self-organising lexical acquisition and recognition (SOLAR) model of visual word recognition (Doctoral dissertation, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, 1999). Dissertation Abstracts International, 62, 594.
17. Davis, C. J., & Bowers, J. S. (2006). Contrasting five different theories of letter position coding: Evidence from orthographic similarity effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 535-557. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.32.3.535
18. Davis, C. J., & Lupker, S. J. (2006). Masked inhibitory priming in English: Evidence for lexical inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 668-687. doi:10.1037/00961523.32.3.668
19. de Groot, A. M. B., & Nas, G. L. (1991). Lexical representation of cognates and noncognates in compound bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 90-123. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(91)90012-9
20. De Moor, W., & Brysbaert, M. (2000). Neighborhood-frequency effects when primes and targets have different lengths. Psychological Research, 63, 159-162. doi:10.1007/PL00008174
21. Deutsch, A., Frost, R., Peleg, S., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2003). Early morphological effects in reading: Evidence from parafoveal preview benefit in Hebrew. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 415-422. doi:10.3758/BF03196500
22. Dunabeitia, J. A., Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (2009). There is no clam with coats in the calm coast: Delimiting the transposed-letter priming effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1930-1947. doi:10.1080/17470210802696070
23. Engbert, R., Longtin, A., & Kliegl, R. (2002). A dynamical model of saccade generation in reading based on spatially distributed lexical processing. Vision Research, 42, 621-636. doi:10.1016/S0042-6989(01)00301-7
24. Engbert, R., Nuthmann, A., Richter, E. M., & Kliegl, R. (2005). SWIFT: A dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. Psychological Review, 112, 777-813. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.777
25. Ferguson, R., Robidoux, S., & Besner, D. (2009). Reading aloud: Evidence for contextual control over lexical activation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 499-507. doi: 10.1037/a0013162
26. Forster, K. I., & Davis, C. W. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 680-698. doi:10.1037/02787393.10.4.680
27. Forster, K. I., & Davis, C. W. (1991). The density constraint on formpriming in the naming task: Interference effects from a masked prime. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 1-25. doi:10.1016/0749596X(91)90008-8
28. Forster, K. I., Davis, C. W., Schoknecht, C., & Carter, R. (1987). Masked priming with graphemically related forms: Repetition or partial activation? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 39A, 211-251. doi:10.1080/14640748708401785
29. Francis, W., & Kucera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
30. Grainger, J. (1990). Word frequency and neighborhood frequency effects in lexical decision and naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 228-244. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(90)90074-A
31. Grainger, J., & Ferrand, L. (1994). Phonology and orthography in visual word recognition: Effects of masked homophone primes. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 218-233. doi:10.1006/jmla.1994.1011
32. Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review, 103, 518-565.
33. Grainger, J., Tydgat, I., & Issele, J. (2010). Crowding affects letters and symbols differently. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 673-688. doi:10.1037/a0016888
34. Grainger, J., & Whitney, C. (2004). Does the huamn mnid raed wrods as a wlohe? Trends In Cognitive Sciences, 8, 58-59. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2003.11.006
35. Henderson, J. M., Dixon, P., Petersen, A., Twilley, L. C., & Ferreira, F. (1995). Evidence for the use of phonological representations during transsaccadic word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 82-97. doi:10.1037/00961523.21.1.82
36. Henderson, J. M., & Ferreira, F. (1990). Effects of foveal processing difficulty on the perceptual span in reading: Implications for attention and eye movement control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 417-429. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.16.3.417
37. Holmes, V. M., & Ng, E. (1993). Word-specific knowledge, wordrecognition strategies, and spelling ability. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 230-257. doi:10.1006/jmla.1993.1013
38. Humphreys, G. W., Evett, L. J., & Quinlan, P. T. (1990). Orthographic processing in visual word identification. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 517-560. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(90)90012-S
39. Hyona, J., & Haikio, T. (2005). Is emotional content obtained from parafoveal words during reading? An eye movement analysis. Scandanavian Journal of Psychology, 46, 475-483. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2005.00479.x
40. Inhoff, A. W. (1989). Lexical access during eye fixations in reading: Are word access codes used to integrate lexical information across interword fixations? Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 444-461. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(89)90021-1
41. Inhoff, A. W., Eiter, B. M., & Radach, R. (2005). The time course of linguistic information extraction from consecutive words during eye fixations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 979-995. doi:10.1037/00961523.31.5.979
42. Inhoff, A. W., Radach, R., & Eiter, B. (2006). Temporal overlap in the linguistic processing of successive words in reading: Reply to Pollatsek, Reichle, and Rayner (2006). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 1490-1495. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.32.6.1490
43. 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.
44. Johnson, R. L. (2007). The flexibility of letter coding: Nonadjacent letter transposition effects in the parafovea. In R. P. G. van Gompel, M. H. Fisher, W. S. Murray, & R. L. Hill (Eds.). Eye movements: A window on mind and brain (pp. 425-440). Oxford, United Kingdom: Elsevier.
45. Johnson, R. L. (2009). The quiet clam is quite calm: Transposed-letter neighborhood effects on eye movements during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 943-969. doi:10.1037/a0015572
46. Johnson, R. L., Perea, M., & Rayner, K. (2007). Transposed-letter effects in reading: Evidence from eye movements and parafoveal preview. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 209-229. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.33.1.209
47. Johnson, R. L., Staub, A., & Fleri, A. M. (2011). Distributional analysis of the transposed-letter neighborhood effect on naming latency. (Manuscript submitted for publication).
48. Kambe, G. (2004). Parafoveal processing of prefixed words during eye fixations in reading: Evidence against morphological influences on parafoveal preprocessing. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 279-292. doi:10.3758/BF03194879
49. Kennedy, A. (1998). The influence of parafoveal words on foveal inspection time: Evidence for a processing trade-off. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Eye guidance in reading and scene perception (pp. 149-179). Oxford, London: Elsevier. doi:10.1016/B978-008043361-5/50008-0
50. Kennedy, A., Murray, W. S., & Boissiere, C. (2004). Parafoveal pragmatics revisited. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 128-153. doi:10.1080/09541440340000187
51. Kennison, S. M., & Clifton, C. (1995). Determinants of parafoveal preview benefit in high and low working memory capacity readers: Implications for eye movement control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 68-81. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.21.1.68
52. Kinoshita, S., & Norris, D. (2009). Transposed-letter priming of prelexical orthographic representations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 1-18. doi:10.1037/a0014277
53. Kliegl, R., & Engbert, R. (2003). SWIFT explorations. In J. Hyona, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind's eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of oculomotor research (pp. 391-411). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
54. Lee, H.-W., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1999). The time course of phonological, semantic, and orthographic coding in reading: Evidence from the fast priming technique. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 6, 624-634. doi:10.3758/BF03212971
55. Levi, D. M. (2008). Crowding-An essential bottleneck for object recognition: A mini-review. Vision Research, 48, 635-654. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2007.12.009
56. Lima, S. D. (1987). Morphological analysis in sentence reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 84-99. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(87)90064-7
57. Massol, S., Grainger, J., Dufau, S., & Holcomb, P. (2010). Masked priming from orthographic neighbors: An ERP investigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 162-174. doi:10.1037/a0017614
58. Mcclelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part I. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.88.5.375
59. Mcconkie, G. W., & Zola, D. (1979). Is visual information integrated across successive fixations in reading? Perception & Psychophysics, 25, 221-224. doi:10.3758/BF03202990
60. Murray, W. S. (1998). Parafoveal pragmatics. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Eye guidance in reading and scene perception (pp. 181-200). Oxford, London: Elsevier. doi:10.1016/B978-008043361-5/50009-2
61. Nakayama, M., Sears, C. R., & Lupker, S. J. (2008). Masked priming with orthographic neighbors: A test of the lexical competition assumption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1236-1260. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.34.5.1236
62. O'Connor, R. E., & Forster, K. I. (1981). Criterion bias and search sequence bias in word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 9, 78-92. doi:10.3758/BF03196953
63. Paap, K. R., & Johansen, L. S. (1994). The case of the vanishing frequency effect: A retest of the verification model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1129-1157. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.20.6.1129
64. 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. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.89.5.573
65. Pelli, D. G., Tillman, K. A., Freeman, J., Su, M., Berger, T. D., & Majaj, N. J. (2007). Crowding and eccentricity determine reading rate. Journal of Vision, 7, 1-36. doi:10.1167/7.2.20
66. Perea, M., & Fraga, I. (2006). Transposed-letter and laterality effects in lexical decision. Brain and Language, 97, 102-109. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2005.08.004
67. Perea, M., & Lupker, S. J. (2003a). Transposed-letter confusability effects in masked form priming. In S. Kinoshita and S. J. Lupker (Eds.), Masked priming: The state of the art (pp. 97-120). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
68. Perea, M., & Lupker, S. J. (2003b). Does jugde activate COURT? Transposed-letter similarity effects in masked associative priming. Memory & Cognition, 31, 829-841. doi:10.3758/BF03196438
69. Perea, M., & Lupker, S. J. (2004). Can CANISO activate CASINO? Transposed-letter similarity effects with nonadjacent letter positions. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 231-246. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2004.05.005
70. Perea, M., & Pollatsek, A. (1998). The effects of neighbor frequency in reading and lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 767-779. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.24.3.767
71. Perea, M., Rosa, E., & Gómez, C. (2005). The frequency effect for pseudowords in the lexical decision task. Perception and Psychophysics, 67, 301-314. doi:10.3758/BF03206493
72. Pollatsek, A., Lesch, M., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1992). Phonological codes are used in integrating information across saccades in word identification and reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 148-162. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.18.1.148
73. Pollatsek, A., Perea, M., & Binder, K. (1999). The effects of "neighborhood size" in reading and lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1142-1158. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.25.4.1142
74. Pollatsek, A., Reichle, E. D., & Rayner, K. (2006a). Tests of the E-Z Reader model: Exploring the interface between cognition and eyemovement control. Cognitive Psychology, 52, 1-56. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.06.001
75. Pollatsek, A., Reichle, E. D., & Rayner, K. (2006b). Attention to one word at a time is still a viable hypothesis: Rejoinder to Inhoff, Radach, and Eiter. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 1496-1500. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.32.6.1496
76. Rayner, K. (1975). The perceptual span and peripheral cues in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 65-81. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(75)90005-5
77. Rayner, K. (1978). Foveal and parafoveal cues in reading. In J. Requin (Ed.), Attention and performance VII (pp. 149-162). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
78. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372
79. Rayner, K., Ashby, J., Pollatsek, A., & Reichle, E. D. (2004). The effects of frequency and predictability on eye fixations in reading: Implications for the E-Z Reader model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 720-732. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.30.4.720
80. Rayner, K., Balota, D. A., & Pollatsek, A. (1986). Against parafoveal semantic preprocessing during eye fixations in reading. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 40, 473-483. doi:10.1037/h0080111
81. Rayner, K., & Kaiser, J. S. (1975). Reading mutilated text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 301-306. doi:10.1037/h0077015
82. Rayner, K., Mcconkie, G. W., & Zola, D. (1980). Integrating information across eye movements. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 206-226. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(80)90009-2
83. Rayner, K., & Morris, R. K. (1992). Eye movement control in reading: Evidence against semantic preprocessing. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance, 18, 163-172. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.18.1.163
84. Rayner, K., Warren, T., Juhasz, B. J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2004). The effect of plausibility on eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 1290-1301. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.30.6.1290
85. Rayner, K., Well, A. D., Pollatsek, A., & Bertera, J. H. (1982). The availability of useful information to the right of fixation in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 31, 537-550. doi:10.3758/BF03204186
86. Rayner, K., White, S., Johnson, R. L., & Liversedge, S. (2006). Raeding wrods with jubmled lettres: There Is a cost. Psychological Science, 17, 192-193. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01684.x
87. Rayner, K., White, S., Kambe, G., Miller, B., & Liversedge, S. P. (2003). On the processing of meaning from parafoveal vision during eye fixations in reading. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind's eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 213-234). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
88. Reichle, E., Liversedge, S., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2009). Encoding multiple words simultaneously in reading is implausible. Trends in Cognitive Science, 13, 115-119. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2008.12.002
89. Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D. L., & Rayner, K. (1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review, 105, 125-157. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.105.1.125
90. Reichle, E. D., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2003). The E-Z Reader model of eye movement control in reading: Comparison to other models. Brain and Behavior Sciences, 26, 445-476. doi:10.1017/S0140525X03000104
91. Robidoux, S., Stolz, J., & Besner, D. (2010). Visual word recognition: Evidence for global and local control over semantic feedback. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 689-703. doi:10.1037/a0018741
92. Rumelhart, D. E., & Mcclelland, J. L. (1982). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Pt. 2. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model. Psychological Review, 89, 60-94. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.89.1.60
93. Schoonbaert, S., & Grainger, J. (2004). Letter position coding in printed word perception: Effects of repeated and transposed letters. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 333-367. doi:10.1080/01690960344000198
94. Segui, J., & Grainger, J. (1990). Priming word recognition with orthographic neighbors: Effects of relative prime-target frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 65-76. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.16.1.65
95. Sereno, S. (1995). Resolution of lexical ambiguity: Evidence from an eye movement priming paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 285-294. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.21.3.582
96. Sereno, S., & Rayner, K. (1992). Fast priming during eye fixations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 173-184. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.18.1.173
97. Slattery, T. (2009). Word misperception, the neighborhood frequency effect, and the role of sentence context: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1969-1975. doi:10.1037/a0016894
98. 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, and Cognition, 21, 596-611. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.21.3.596
99. Taft, M., & van Graan, F. (1998). Lack of phonological mediation in a semantic categorization task. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 203-224. doi:10.1006/jmla.1997.2538
100. Underwood, G. (1981). Lexical recognition of embedded unattended words: Some implications for reading processes. Ac/a Psychologica, 34, 267-283. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(81)90012-3
101. Underwood, G. (1985). Eye movements during the comprehension of written language. In A. W. Ellis (Ed.), Progress in the psychology of language (Vol. 2, pp. 45-71). London: Erlbaum.
102. Underwood, G., Clews, S., & Everatt, J. (1990). How do readers know where to look next? Local information distributions influence eye fixations. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 42A, 39-65.
103. van Heuven, W., Dijkstra, T., Grainger, J., & Schriefers, H. (2001). Shared neighborhood effects in masked orthographic priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 96-101. doi:10.3758/BF03196144
104. Wang, S.-P., Tong, X.-H., Yang, J-M., & Leng, Y. (2009). Semantic codes are obtained before word fixation in Chinese sentence reading: Evidence from eye-movements. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 41, 220-232. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2009.00220
105. White, S., Bertram, R., & Hyona, J. (2008). Semantic processing of previews within compound words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 988-993. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.34.4.988
106. White, S., Johnson, R. L., Liversedge, S., & Rayner, K. (2008). Eye movements when reading transposed text: The importance of wordbeginning letters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1261-1276. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.34.5.1261
107. Whitney, C. (2001). How the brain encodes the order of letters in a printed word: The SERIOL model and selective literature review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 221-243. doi:10.3758/BF03196158
108. Whitney, C., & Berndt, R. S. (1999). A new model of letter string encoding: Simulating right neglect dyslexia. In J. A. Reggia, E. Ruppin, & D. Glanzman (Eds.), Progress in brain research (Vol. 121, pp. 143-163). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
109. Williams, C. C., Perea, M., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2006). Previewing the neighborhood: The role of orthographic neighbors as parafoveal previews in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 1072-1082. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.32.4.1072
110. Ziegler, J. C., Ferrand, L., Jacobs, A. M., Rey, A., & Grainger, J. (2000). Visual and phonological codes in letter and word recognition: Evidence from incremental priming. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 671-692. doi:10.1080/027249800410508