What can megastudies tell us about the orthographic structure of English words?

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 68, Issue 8, 2015, Pages 1519-1540

  Chetail, Fabienne ^a   Balota, David ^b   Treiman, Rebecca ^b   Content, Alain ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ LIBRE DE BRUXELLES   (Belgium)

^b WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Consonant vowel pattern; Hiatus words; Megastudies; Visual word recognition

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; LEARNING; LINGUISTICS; MALE; NOMENCLATURE; PHONETICS; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; REACTION TIME; READING; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

ALGORITHMS; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MALE; NAMES; PHONETICS; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REACTION TIME; READING; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; VERBAL LEARNING; VOCABULARY;

EID: 84936846096     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2014.963628     Document Type: Article

References (91)

1. C.J.Alvarez,, M.Carreiras,, & M.De Vega, (2000). Syllable-frequency effect in visual word recognition: Evidence of sequential-type processing. Psicologica, 21, 341–374.
2. S.Andrews, (1997). The effect of orthographic similarity on lexical retrieval: Resolving neighborhood conflicts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 439–461. doi:10.3758/BF03214334
3. B.Ans,, S.Carbonnel,, & S.Valdois, (1998). A connectionist multiple-trace memory model for polysyllabic word reading. Psychological Review, 105, 678–723. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.105.4.678-723
4. D.A.Balota,, M.J.Cortese,, S.D.Sergent-Marshall,, D.H.Spieler,, & M.J.Yap, (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 283–316. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.2.283
5. D.A.Balota,, M.J.Yap,, K.A.Hutchison,, M.J.Cortese,, B.Kessler,, B.Loftis,, … R.Treiman, (2007). The English Lexicon Project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445–459. doi:10.3758/BF03193014
6. Berent, I., & Perfetti, C. A. (1995). A rose is a REEZ: The two-cycles model of phonology assembly in reading English. Psychological Review, 102, 146–184. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.146
7. M.Brysbaert,, & B.New, (2009). Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 977–990. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.977
8. Caramazza, A., & Miceli, G. (1990). The structure of graphemic representations. Cognition, 37, 243–297. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(90)90047-N
9. M.Carreiras,, C.J.Alvarez,, & M.De Vega, (1993). Syllable frequency and visual word recognition in Spanish. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 766–780. doi:10.1006/jmla.1993.1038
10. M.Carreiras,, L.Ferrand,, J.Grainger,, & M.Perea, (2005). Sequential effects of phonological priming in visual word recognition. Psychological Science, 16, 585–589. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01821.x doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01579.x
11. Center for Speech Technology Research, University of Edinburgh. (n.d.). Unisyn Lexicon [Data file]. Retrieved July 19, 2004, from www.cstr.ed.ac.uk/projects/unisyn
12. F.Chetail,, & A.Content, (2012). The internal structure of chaos: Letter category determines visual word perceptual units. Journal of Memory and Language, 67, 371–388. doi:dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.07.004 doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.07.004
13. F.Chetail,, & A.Content, (2013). Segmentation of written words in French. Language and Speech, 56, 125–144. doi:10.1177/0023830912442919
14. F.Chetail,, & A.Content, (2014). What is the difference between OASIS and OPERA? Roughly five pixels. Orthographic structure biases the perceived length of letter strings. Psychological Science, 25, 143–149.
15. F.Chetail,, V.Drabs,, & A.Content, (2014). The role of consonant/vowel organization in perceptual discrimination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 40, 938–961.
16. F.Chetail,, & S.Mathey, (2009). Syllabic priming in lexical decision and naming tasks: The syllable congruency effect re-examined in French. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 40–48. doi:10.1037/a0012944
17. J.Cohen,, P.Cohen,, S.G.West,, & L.S.Aiken, (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
18. Colombo, L., Zorzi, M., Cubelli, R., & Brivio, C. (2003). The status of consonants and vowels in phonological assembly: Testing the two-cycles model with Italian. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 15, 405–433. doi:10.1080/09541440303605
19. M.Coltheart, (1978). Lexical access in simple reading tasks. In G.Underwood (Ed.), Strategies of information processing (pp. 151–216). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
20. Conrad, M., Tamm, S., Carreiras, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (2010). Simulating syllable frequency effects within an interactive activation framework. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22, 861–893. doi:10.1080/09541440903356777
21. A.Cutler,, S.Butterfield,, & J.N.Williams, (1987). The perceptual integrity of syllabic onsets. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 406–418. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(87)90099-4
22. C.J.Davis, (2010). The spatial coding model of visual word identification. Psychological Review, 117, 713–758. doi: 10.1037/a0019738
23. C.J.Davis,, & J.S.Bowers, (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
24. B.De Cara,, & U.Goswami, (2002). Similarity relations among spoken words: The special status of rimes in English. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 34, 416–423. doi:10.3758/BF03195470
25. Duñabeitia, J. A., & Carreiras, M. (2011). The relative position priming effect depends on whether letters are vowels or consonants. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1143–1163. doi:10.1037/a0023577
26. M.E.Faust,, D.A.Balota,, D.H.Spieler,, & F.R.Ferraro, (1999). Individual differences in information-processing rate and amount: Implications for group differences in response latency. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 777–799. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.777
27. L.Ferrand,, & B.New, (2003). Syllabic length effects in visual word recognition and naming. Acta Psychologica, 113, 167–183. doi:10.1016/S0001-6918(03)00031-3
28. L.Ferrand,, B.New,, M.Brysbaert,, E.Keuleers,, P.Bonin,, A.Méot, (2010). The French Lexicon Project: Lexical decision data for 38,840 French words and 38,840 pseudowords. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 488–496. doi:10.3758/BRM.42.2.488
29. K.I.Forster,, C.Davis,, C.Schoknecht,, & R.Carter, (1987). Masked priming with graphemically related forms: Repetition or partial activation? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39, 211–251. doi:10.1080/14640748708401785
30. R.Frost, (2012). Towards a universal model of reading. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35, 263–279. doi:10.1017/S0140525X11001841
31. E.J.Gibson, (1965). Learning to read. Annals of Dyslexia, 15, 32–47.
32. P.Gómez,, R.Ratcliff,, & M.Perea, (2008). The Overlap Model: A model of letter position coding. Psychological Review, 115, 577–600. doi:10.1037/a0012667
33. Grainger, J., & Ferrand, L. (1996). Masked orthographic and phonological priming in visual word recognition and naming: Cross-task comparisons. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 623–647. doi:10.1006/jmla.1996.0033
34. J.Grainger, & W.Van Heuven, (2003). Modeling letter position coding in printed word perception. In P.Bonin (Ed.), The mental lexicon (pp. 1–24). New York: Nova Science Publishers.
35. B.Kessler,, R.Treiman,, & J.Mullennix, (2008). Feedback-consistency effects in single-word reading. In E.L.Grigorenko & A.J.Naples (Eds.), Single-word reading: Behavioral and biological perspectives (pp. 159–174). New York: Erlbaum.
36. E.Keuleers,, M.Brysbaert,, & B.New, (2010). SUBTLEX-NL: A new measure for Dutch word frequency based on film subtitles. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 643–650. doi:10.3758/BRM.42.3.643
37. E.Keuleers,, K.Diependaele,, & M.Brysbaert, (2010). Practice effects in large-scale visual word recognition studies: A lexical decision study on 14,000 Dutch mono-and disyllabic words and nonwords. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 1. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00174
38. E.Keuleers,, P.Lacey,, K.Rastle,, & M.Brysbaert, (2012). The British Lexicon Project: Lexical decision data for 28,730 monosyllabic and disyllabic English words. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 287–304. doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0118-4
39. M.Lange, (2000). Processus d'accès à la pronunciation dans le traitement des mots écrits [Processes of access to the pronunciation during written word processing]. Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
40. C.H.Lee,, & M.Taft, (2009). Are onsets and codas important in processing letter position? A comparison of TL effects in English and Korean. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 530–542. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.01.002
41. C.H.Lee,, & M.Taft, (2011). Subsyllabic structure reflected in letter confusability effects in Korean word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 129–134. doi:10.3758/s13423-010-0028-y
42. W.J.Levelt,, & L.Wheeldon, (1994). Do speakers have access to a mental syllabary? Cognition, 50, 239–269. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(94)90030-2
43. C.-M.Longtin,, J.Segui,, & P.A.Hallé, (2003). Morphological priming without morphological relationship. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18, 313–334. doi:10.1080/01690960244000036
44. S.J.Lupker,, J.Acha,, C.J.Davis,, & M.Perea, (2012). An investigation of the role of grapheme units in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 1491–1516. doi:10.1037/a0026886
45. Lupker, S. J., Perea, M., & Davis, C. J. (2008). Transposed-letter effects: Consonants, vowels and letter frequency. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 93–116. doi:10.1080/01690960701579714
46. N.Maionchi-Pino,, A.Magnan,, & J.Ecalle, (2010). Syllable frequency effects in visual word recognition: Developmental approach in French children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 31(1), 70–82. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2009.08.003
47. E.Marinus,, & P.F.De Jong, (2011). Dyslexic and typical-reading children use vowel digraphs as perceptual units in reading. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 504–516. doi:10.1080/17470218.2010.509803
48. Marom, M., & Berent, I. (2010). Phonological constraints on the assembly of skeletal structure in reading. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 39, 67–88
49. D.W.Massaro,, R.L.Venezky,, & G.A.Taylor, (1979). Orthographic regularity, positional frequency, and visual processing of letter strings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108, 107–124. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.108.1.107
50. S.J.Muncer,, & D.C.Knight, (2012). The bigram trough hypothesis and the syllable number effect in lexical decision. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 2221–2230. doi:10.1080/17470218.2012.697176
51. S.J.Muncer,, D.Knight,, & J.W.Adams, (in press). Bigram frequency, number of syllables and morphemes and their effects on lexical decision and word naming. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. doi:10.1007/s10936-013-9252-8
52. New, B., Araújo, V., & Nazzi, T. (2008). Differential processing of consonants and vowels in lexical access through reading. Psychological Science, 19, 1223–1227. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02228.x
53. B.New,, L.Ferrand,, C.Pallier,, & M.Brysbaert, (2006). Reexamining the word length effect in visual word recognition: New evidence from the English Lexicon Project. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 45–52. doi:10.3758/BF03193811
54. D.Norris,, S.Kinoshita,, & M.Van Casteren, (2010). A stimulus sampling theory of letter identity and order. Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 254–271. doi:dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.11.002 doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2009.11.002
55. K.E.Patterson,, & J.Morton, (1985). From orthography to phonology: An attempt at an old interpretation. In K.E.Patterson, J.C.Marshall, & M.Coltheart (Eds.), Surface dyslexia (pp. 335–359). London: Erlbaum.
56. R.Peereman,, M.Brand,, & A.Rey, (2006). Letter-by-letter processing in the phonological conversion of multiletter graphemes: Searching for sounds in printed pseudowords. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 38–44. doi:10.3758/BF03193810
57. Perea, M., & Acha, J. (2009). Does letter position coding depend on consonant/vowel status? Evidence with the masked priming technique. Acta Psychologica, 130, 127–137. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.11.001
58. M.Perea,, R.abu Mallouh,, & M.Carreiras, (2010). The search for an input-coding scheme: Transposed-letter priming in Arabic. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 375–380. doi:10.3758/BF03196438 doi: 10.3758/PBR.17.3.375
59. F.Peressotti,, & J.Grainger, (1999). The role of letter identity and letter position in orthographic priming. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 691–706. doi:10.3758/BF03205539
60. C.Perry,, J.C.Ziegler,, & M.Zorzi, (2007). Nested incremental modeling in the development of computational theories: The CDP+ model of reading aloud. Psychological Review, 114, 273–315. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.114.2.273
61. C.Perry,, J.C.Ziegler,, & M.Zorzi, (2010). Beyond single syllables: Large-scale modeling of reading aloud with the Connectionist Dual Process (CDP++) model. Cognitive Psychology, 61, 106–151. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2010.04.001
62. W.Prinzmetal,, R.Treiman,, & S.H.Rho, (1986). How to see a reading unit. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 461–475. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(86)90038-0
63. K.Rastle,, & M.Coltheart, (1998). Whammies and double whammies: The effect of length on nonword reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 277–282. doi:10.3758/BF03212951
64. A.Rey,, J.C.Ziegler,, & A.M.Jacobs, (2000). Graphemes are perceptual reading units. Cognition, 75, B1–B12. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00078-5
65. A.Rouibah,, & M.Taft, (2001). The role of syllabic structure in French word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 29, 373–381. doi:10.3758/BF03194932
66. M.S.Seidenberg, (1987). Sublexical structures in visual word recognition: Access units or orthographic redundancy?. In M.Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and Performance, XII: The Psychology of Reading (pp. 245–263). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
67. P.H.K.Seymour,, M.Aro,, J.M.Erskine,, & Network, collaboration with C. A. A. (2003). Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 143–174. doi:10.1348/000712603321661859
68. Shallice, T., & McCarthy, R. (1985). Phonological reading: From patterns of impairment to possible procedures. In K. E. Patterson, J. C. Marshall, & M. Colheart (Eds.), Surface Dyslexia: Neuropsychological and cognitive studies of phonological reading (pp. 361–397). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
69. E.Spinelli,, S.Kandel,, H.Guerassimovitch,, & L.Ferrand, (2012). Graphemic cohesion effect in reading and writing complex graphemes. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 770–791. doi:10.1080/01690965.2011.586534
70. K.T.Spoehr,, & E.E.Smith, (1973). The role of syllables in perceptual processing. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 71–89. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90026-1
71. G.O.Stone,, & G.C.Van Orden, (1994). Building a resonance framework for word recognition using design and system principles. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 1248–1268.
72. W.P.Sze,, S.J.R.Liow,, & M.J.Yap, (2014). The Chinese Lexicon Project: A repository of lexical decision behavioral responses for 2,500 Chinese characters. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 263–273. doi:10.3758/s13428-013-0355-9
73. M.Taft, (1979). Lexical access-via an orthographic code: The basic orthographic syllabic structure (BOSS). Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 21–39. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90544-9
74. M.Taft, (1987). Morphological processing: The BOSS re-ermerges. In M.Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and Performance XII (pp. 265–279). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
75. M.Taft, (1991). Reading and the mental lexicon. Exeter: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
76. M.Taft, (1992). The body of the BOSS - Sublexical units in the lexical processing of polysyllabic words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Leaning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 1004–1014.
77. M.Taft,, C.J.Álvarez,, & M.Carreiras, (2007). Cross-language differences in the use of internal orthographic structure when reading polysyllabic words. The Mental Lexicon, 2, 49–63. doi:10.1075/ml.2.1.04taf
78. M.Taft,, & L.Krebs-Lazendic, (2013). The role of orthographic syllable structure in assigning letters to their position in visual word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 85–97. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.10.004
79. R.Treiman, (1986). The division between onsets and rimes in English syllables. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 476–491. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(86)90039-2
80. R.Treiman, & J.Chafetz, (1987). Are there onset- and rime-like units in printed words?. In M.Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance XII (pp. 282–297). Hillslade: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
81. R.Treiman,, J.Mullennix,, R.Bijeljac-Babic,, & E.D.Richmond-Welty, (1995). The special role of rimes in the description, use, and acquisition of English orthography. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 107–136. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.107
82. N.Vallée,, I.Rousset,, L.-J.Boë, (2001). Des lexiques aux syllabes des langues du monde. Linx, 45, 37–50. doi:10.4000/linx.721 doi: 10.4000/linx.721
83. A.Van den Bosch,, A.Content,, W.Daelemans,, & B.De Gelder, (1994). Measuring the complexity of writing systems. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 1(3), 178–188. doi:10.1080/09296179408590015
84. Van Heuven, W. J. B., Mandera, P., Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2014). SUBTLEX-UK: A new and improved word frequency database for British English. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 1176–1190. doi:10.1080/17470218.2013.850521
85. H.Velan,, & R.Frost, (2009). Letter-transposition effects are not universal: The impact of transposing letters in Hebrew. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 285–302. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.05.003
86. C.Whitney, (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. doi:10.3758/BF03196158
87. M.J.Yap, (2007). Visual word recognition: Explorations of megastudies, multisyllabic words, and individual differences. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Washington University in Saint Louis, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
88. M.J.Yap,, & D.A.Balota, (2009). Visual word recognition of multisyllabic words. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 502–529. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.02.001
89. M.J.Yap,, S.J.Liow,, S.B.Jalil,, & S.S.Faizal, (2010). The Malay Lexicon Project: A database of lexical statistics for 9,592 words. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 992–1003. doi: 10.3758/BRM.42.4.992
90. T.Yarkoni,, D.Balota,, & M.Yap, (2008). Moving beyond Coltheart's N: A new measure of orthographic similarity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 971–979. doi:10.3738/PBR.15.5.971 doi: 10.3758/PBR.15.5.971
91. J.C.Ziegler,, A.M.Jacobs,, & G.O.Stone, (1996). Statistical analysis of the bidirectional inconsistency of spelling and sound in French. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28, 504–515. doi:10.3758/BF03200539