Orthographic neighborhood effects as a function of word frequency: An event-related potential study

Psychophysiology

Volumn 49, Issue 9, 2012, Pages 1277-1289

  Vergara Martínez, Marta ^a,b   Swaab, Tamara Y ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VALENCIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Cognition; EEG ERP; Language speech; Normal volunteers

Indexed keywords

EID: 84865305768     PISSN: 00485772     EISSN: 14698986     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2012.01410.x     Document Type: Article

References (60)

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. Andrews, S. (1996). Lexical retrieval and selection processes: Effects of transposed-letter confusability. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 775-800. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1996.0040
3. Balota, D. A., & Chumbley, J. I. (1984). Are lexical decisions a good measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 340-357. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.10.3.340
4. Barber, H. A., & Kutas, M. (2007). Interplay between computational models and cognitive electrophysiology in visual word recognition. Brain Research Reviews, 53, 98-123. doi: 10.1016/j.brainresrev.2006.07.002
5. Barber, H. A., Vergara, M., & Carreiras, M. (2004). Syllable-frequency effects in visual word recognition: Evidence from ERPs. Neuroreport, 15, 545-548. doi: 10.1097/00001756-200403010-00032
6. Carreiras, M., Mechelli, A., & Price, C. (2006). The effect of word and syllable frequency on activation during lexical decision and reading aloud. Human Brain Mapping, 27, 863-972. doi: 10.1002/hbm.20236
7. Carreiras, M., Perea, M., & Grainger, J. (1997). Effects of orthographic neighborhood in visual word recognition: Cross-task comparisons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 857-871. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.23.4.857
8. Carreiras, M., Riba, J., Vergara, M., Heldmann, M., and Münte, T. F. (2009). Syllable congruency and word frequency effects on brain activation. Human Brain Mapping, 30, 3079-3088. doi: 10.1002/hbm.20730
9. Carreiras, M., Vergara, M., & Barber, H. (2005). Early event-related potential effects of syllabic processing during visual word recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 1803-1817. doi: 10.1162/089892905774589217
10. Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC psycholinguistic database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, Section A: Human Experimental Psychology 33, 497-505. doi: 10.1080/14640748108400805
11. Coltheart, M., Curtis, B., Atkins, P., & Haller, M. (1993). Models of reading aloud-Dual-route and parallel-distributed-processing approaches. Psychological Review, 100, 589-608.
12. Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, J. E., & Besner, D. (1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornio (Ed.), Attention and performance VI (pp. 535-555). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R. & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204-256. doi: 10.1037//0033-295X.108.1.204
14. Dambacher, M., Kliegl, R., Hofmann, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (2006). Frequency and predictability effects on event-related potentials during reading. Brain Research, 1084, 89-103. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.02.010
15. Davis, C. J., Perea, M., & Acha, J. (2009). Re(de)fining the orthographic neighborhood: The role of addition and deletion neighbors in lexical decision and reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1550-1570.
16. Davis, C. J., & Taft, M. (2005). More words in the neighborhood: Interference in lexical decision due to deletion neighbors. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 12, 904-910. doi: 10.3758/BF03196784
17. Ellis, A. W., & Young, A. (1988). Human cognitive neuropsychology. London, UK: Erlbaum.
18. Forster, K. I., & Hector, J. (2002). Cascaded versus noncascaded models of lexical and semantic processing: The turple effect. Memory & Cognition, 30, 1106-1116. doi: 10.3758/BF03194328
19. Forster, K. I., & Shen, D. (1996). No enemies in the neighborhood: Absence of inhibitory neighborhood effects in lexical decision and semantic categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 696-713. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.22.3.696
20. Francis, W. N., & Kucěra, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
21. Ganis, G., Kutas, M., & Sereno, M. I (1996). The search for the "common sense": An electrophysiological study of the comprehension of words. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 89-106. doi: 10.1162/jocn.1996.8.2.89
22. Goh, W. D., Suárez, L., Yap, M. J., & Tan, S. H. (2009). Distributional analyses in auditory lexical decision: Neighborhood density and word frequency effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 882-887. doi: 10.3758/PBR.16.5.882
23. Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2009). Watching the word go by: On the time-course of component processes in visual word recognition. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3, 128-156. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00121.x
24. Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review 103, 518-565. doi: 10.1037//0033-295X.103.3.518
25. Grainger, J., & van Heuven, W. (2003). Modeling letter position coding in printed word perception. In P. Bonin (Ed.), The mental lexicon. (pp. 1-24). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
26. Grainger, J., & Whitney, C. (2004). Does the huamn mind raed wrods as a wlohe? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 58-59. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2003.11.006
27. Grainger, J., & Ziegler, J. C. (2011). A dual-route approach to orthographic processing. Frontiers in Language Sciences, 2, 1-13. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00054
28. Greenhouse, S. W., & Geisser, S. (1959). On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika, 24, 95-112.
29. Hauk, O., & Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Effects of word length and frequency on the human event-related potential. Clinical Neurophysiology, 115, 1090-1103. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2003.12.020
30. Holcomb, P. J., Grainger, J., & O'Rourke, T. (2002). An electrophysiological study of the effects of orthographic neighborhood size on printed word perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 938-950. doi: 10.1162/089892902760191153
31. Johnson, R. (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
32. Kounios, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (1994). Concreteness effects in semantic processing: ERP evidence supporting dual-coding theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 804-823. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.20.4.804
33. Kutas, M., & Federmeier K. D. (2000). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 463-470. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01560-6
34. Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2009). N400. Scholarpedia, 4, 7790.
35. Laszlo, S., & Federmeier, K. D. (2009). A beautiful day in the neighborhood: An event-related potential study of lexical relationships and prediction in context. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 326-338. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2009.06.004
36. Laszlo, S., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). The N400 as a snapshot of interactive processing: Evidence from regression analyses of orthographic neighbor and lexical associate effects. Psychophysiology, 48, 176-186. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01058.x
37. Levenshtein, V. I. (1966). Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Soviet Physics Doklady, 10, 707-710.
38. Luce, P. A., & Pisoni D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing, 19, 1-36. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199802000-00001
39. Lund, K., & Burgess, C. (1996). Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co-occurrence. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 28, 203-208. doi: 10.3758/BF03204766
40. 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
41. McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407. doi: 10.1037//0033-295X.88.5.375
42. Midgley, K., Holcomb, P. J., van Heuven, W. J. B., & Grainger, J. (2008). An electrophysiological investigation of cross-language effects of orthographic neighborhood. Brain Research, 1246, 123-135. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2008.09.078
43. Müller, O., Duñabeitia, J. A, & Carreiras, M. (2010). Orthographic and associative neighborhood density effects: What is shared, what is different? Psychophysiology, 47, 455-466. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00960.x
44. Neville, H., Mills, D. L., & Lawson, D. S. (1992). Fractionating language: Different neural subsystems with different sensitive periods. Cerebral Cortex, 2, 244-258. doi: 10.1093/cercor/2.3.244
45. Perea, M., & Pollatsek, A. (1998). The effects of neighborhood 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
46. Pollatsek, A., Perea, M., & Binder, K. S. (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
47. Proverbio, A. M., Vecchi, L., & Zani, A. (2004). From orthography to phonetics: ERP measures of grapheme-to-phoneme conversion mechanisms in reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 301-317. doi: 10.1162/089892904322984580
48. Sears, C. R., Hino, Y., & Lupker, S. J. (1995). Neighborhood size and neighborhood frequency effects in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 21, 876-900. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.21.4.876
49. Sereno, S. C., Brewer, C. C., & O'Donnell, P. J. (2003). Context effects in word recognition: Evidence for early interactive processing. Psychological Science, 14, 328-333. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.14471
50. Sereno, S. C., Rayner, K., & Posner, M. I. (1998). Establishing a time-line of word recognition: Evidence from eye movements and event-related potentials. Neuroreport, 9, 2195-2200. doi: 10.1097/00001756-199807130-00009
51. Slattery, T. J., (2009). Word misperception, the neighbor 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
52. Smith, M. E., & Halgren, E. (1987). Event-related potentials during lexical decision: Effects of repetition, word frequency, pronounceability, concreteness. [Supplement] Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 40, 417-421.
53. Swaab, T. Y, Baynes, K, & Knight, R. T. (2002). Separable effects of priming and imageability on word processing: An ERP study. Cognitive Brain Research, 15, 99-103. doi: 10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00219-7
54. van Heuven, W. J. B, Dijkstra, T., & Grainger, J. (1998). Orthographic neighborhood effects in bilingual word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 458-483. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1998.2584
55. Van Petten, C., & Kutas, M. (1990). Interactions between sentence context and word frequency in event-related brain potentials. Memory and Cognition, 18, 380-393. doi: 10.3758/BF03197127
56. Vergara-Martínez, M., Perea, M., Marín, A., & Carreiras, M. (2011). The processing of consonants and vowels during letter identity and letter position assignment in visual-word recognition: An ERP study. Brain and Language, 118, 105-117. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2010.09.006
57. 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
58. Whitney, C. (2004). Hemisphere-specific effects in word recognition do not require hemisphere-specific modes of access. Brain and Language, 88, 279-293. doi: 10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00160-3
59. Yarkoni, T., Balota, D., & Yap, M. (2008). Moving beyond Coltheart's N: A new measure of orthographic similarity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 971-979. doi: 10.3758/PBR.15.5.971
60. Ziegler, J. C., Rey, A., & Jacobs, A. M., (1998). Simulating individual word identification thresholds and errors in the fragmentation task. Memory and Cognition, 26, 490-501. doi: 10.3758/BF03201158