How Word Meaning Influences Word Reading

Current Directions in Psychological Science

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 322-328

  Taylor, J S H ^a   Duff, Fiona J ^b   Woollams, Anna M ^c   Monaghan, Padraic ^d   Ricketts, Jessie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^d LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

learning; orthography; phonology; reading; semantics

Indexed keywords

EID: 84939244545     PISSN: 09637214     EISSN: 14678721     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963721415574980     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. K.Nation (2009). Form–meaning links in the development of visual word recognition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364, 3665–3674. doi:10.1098/rstb.2009.0119. Discusses the role of meaning in reading development, using connectionist models as a framework, and suggests directions for future modeling and empirical research.
2. P.Pexman (2012). Meaning-based influences on visual word recognition. In J.S.Adelman (Ed.), Visual word recognition volume 2 (pp. 24–43). Hove, England: Psychology Press. Provides recent insights into the role of meaning in word recognition in adults.
3. C.J.PriceJ.T.Devlin (2011). The interactive account of ventral occipitotemporal contributions to reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 246–253. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2011.04.001. Proposes that visual word recognition is aided by top-down contributions from brain regions involved in processing linguistic information, such as phonology and semantics.
4. M.S.Seidenberg (2012). Computational models of reading: Connectionist and dual-route approaches. In M.SpiveyK.McRaeM.Joanisse (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 186–203). Cambridge University Press. An accessible review of alternative approaches to computational models of reading.
5. A.M.Woollams (2014). Connectionist neuropsychology: Uncovering ultimate causes of acquired dyslexia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 369. doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0398. Presents an overview of recent research concerning acquired dyslexia, with an emphasis on how visual, semantic, and phonological processing abilities support reading.
6. A.L.R.AdlamK.PattersonT.T.RogersP.J.NestorC.H.SalmondJ.Acosta-CabroneroJ.R.Hodges (2006). Semantic dementia and fluent primary progressive aphasia: Two sides of the same coin?Brain, 129, 3066–3080. doi:10.1093/brain/awl285
7. D.A.Balota (1990). The role of meaning in word recognition. In D.A.BalotaG.F.D’ArcaisK.Rayner (Eds.), Comprehension processes in reading (pp. 9–32). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. M.CarreirasB.C.ArmstrongM.PereaR.Frost (2014). The what, when, where, and how of visual word recognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 90–98.
9. M.ColtheartK.RastleC.PerryR.LangdonJ.Ziegler (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
10. M.J.CorteseJ.Schock (2013). Imageability and age of acquisition effects in disyllabic word recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 946–972. doi:10.1080/17470218.2012.722660
11. J.CrispD.HowardM.A.Lambon Ralph (2011). More evidence for a continuum between phonological and deep dyslexia: Novel data from three measures of direct orthography-to-phonology translation. Aphasiology, 25, 615–641. doi:10.1080/02687038.2010.541470
12. R.DaviesA.BarbónF.Cuetos (2013). Lexical and semantic age-of-acquisition effects on word naming in Spanish. Memory & Cognition, 41, 297–311. doi:10.3758/s13421-012-0263-8
13. R.DaviesM.WilsonF.CuetosC.Burani (2014). Reading in Spanish and Italian: Effects of age of acquisition in transparent orthographies?Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 1808–1825. doi:10.1080/17470218.2013.872155
14. K.DilkinaJ.L.McClellandD.C.Plaut (2008). A single-system account of semantic and lexical deficits in five semantic dementia patients. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 25, 136–164. doi:10.1080/02643290701723948
15. F.J.DuffC.Hulme (2012). The role of children’s phonological and semantic knowledge in learning to read words. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16, 504–525. doi:10.1080/10888438.2011.598199
16. K.S.GrahamJ.R.HodgesK.Patterson (1994). The relationship between comprehension and oral reading in progressive fluent aphasia. Neuropsychologia, 32, 299–316. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(94)90133-3
17. W.W.GravesR.DesaiC.HumphriesM.S.SeidenbergJ.R.Binder (2010). Neural systems for reading aloud: A multiparametric approach. Cerebral Cortex, 20, 1799–1815. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp245
18. O.HaukC.CoutoutA.HoldenY.Chen (2012). The time-course of single-word reading: Evidence from fast behavioral and brain responses. NeuroImage, 60, 1462–1477. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.01.061
19. M.HarmM.S.Seidenberg (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 111, 662–720. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.111.3.662
20. F.KherifG.JosseC.J.Price (2010). Automatic top-down processing explains common left occipito-temporal responses to visual words and objects. Cerebral Cortex, 21, 103–114. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhq063
21. M.A.Lambon RalphS.Ehsan (2006). Age of acquisition effects depend on the mapping between representations and the frequency of occurrence: Empirical and computational evidence. Visual Cognition, 13, 928–948. doi:10.1080/13506280544000110
22. G.McArthurP.M.EveK.JonesE.BanalesS.KohnenT.AnandakumarA.. CastlesPhonics training for English-speaking poor readers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 12, Article CD009115. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009115.pub2
23. M.McKagueC.PrattM.B.Johnston (2001). The effect of oral vocabulary on reading visually novel words: A comparison of the dual-route-cascaded and triangle frameworks. Cognition, 80, 231–262. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00150-5
24. J.L.MetsalaA.C.Walley (1998). Spoken vocabulary growth and the segmental restructuring of lexical representations: Precursors to phonemic awareness and early reading ability. In J.L.MetsalaL.C.Ehri (Eds.), Word recognition in beginning literacy (pp. 89–120). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. P.MonaghanM.H.ChristiansenS.A.Fitneva (2011). The arbitrariness of the sign: Learning advantages from the structure of the vocabulary. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 325–347. doi:10.1037/a0022924
26. P.MonaghanA.W.Ellis (2010). Modeling reading development: Cumulative, incremental learning in a computational model of word naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 63, 506–525. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2010.08.003
27. K.NationM.J.Snowling (2004). Beyond phonological skills: Broader language skills contribute to the development of reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 27, 342–356. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2004.00238.x
28. A.NestorM.BehrmannD.C.Plaut (2013). The neural basis of visual word form processing: A multivariate investigation. Cerebral Cortex, 23, 1673–1684. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhs158
29. K.PattersonJ.R.Hodges (1992). Deterioration of word meaning: Implications for reading. Neuropsychologia, 30, 1025–1040. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(92)90096-5
30. K.PattersonP.J.NestorT.T.Rogers (2007). Where do you know what you know? The representation of semantic knowledge in the human brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8, 976–987.
31. C.PerryJ.C.ZieglerM.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
32. D.C.PlautJ.L.McClellandM.SeidenbergK.Patterson (1996). Understanding normal and impaired word reading: Computational principles in quasi-regular domains. Psychological Review, 103, 56–115. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.103.1.56
33. J.RickettsK.NationD.V.M.Bishop (2007). Vocabulary is important for some, but not all reading skills. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 235–257. doi:10.1080/10888430701344306
34. D.J.RobertsM.A.Lambon RalphA.M.Woollams (2010). When does less yield more? The impact of severity upon implicit recognition in pure alexia. Neuropsychologia, 48, 2437–2446. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.04.002
35. T.T.RogersM.A.Lambon RalphJ.R.HodgesK.Patterson (2004). Natural selection: The impact of semantic impairment on lexical and object decision. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 21, 331–352.
36. D.L.Share (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151–218. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(94)00645-2
37. A.C.SmithP.MonaghanF.Huettig (2013). An amodal shared resource model of language-mediated visual attention. Frontiers in Language Sciences, 4, Article 528. Retrieved from http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00528/full
38. A.C.SmithP.MonaghanF.Huettig (2014). Literacy effects on language and vision: Emergent effects from an amodal shared resource (ASR) computational model. Cognitive Psychology, 75, 28–54. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2014.07.002
39. J.S.H.TaylorK.PlunkettK.Nation (2011). The influence of consistency, frequency, and semantics on learning to read: An artificial orthography paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 60–76. doi:10.1037/a0020126
40. J.S.H.TaylorK.RastleM.H.Davis (2013). Can cognitive models explain brain activation during word and pseudoword reading? A meta-analysis of 36 neuroimaging studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 766–791. doi:10.1037/a0030266
41. J.S.H.TaylorK.RastleM.H.Davis (2014a). Distinct neural specializations for learning to read words and name objects. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 26, 2128–2154. doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00614
42. J.S.H.TaylorK.RastleM.H.Davis (2014b). Interpreting response time effects in functional imaging studies. NeuroImage, 99, 419–433. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.05.073
43. W.E.TunmerJ.W.Chapman (2012). Does set for variability mediate the influence of vocabulary knowledge on the development of word recognition skills?Scientific Studies of Reading, 16, 122–140. doi:10.1080/10888438.2010.542527
44. M.VisserE.JefferiesM.A.Lambon Ralph (2010). Semantic processing in the anterior temporal lobes: A meta-analysis of the functional neuroimaging literature. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 1083–1094. doi:10.1162/jocn.2009.21309
45. H.C.WangL.NickelsK.NationA.Castles (2013). Predictors of orthographic learning of regular and irregular words. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17, 369–384. doi:10.1080/10888438.2012.749879
46. C.WilliamsT.Bever (2010). Chinese character decoding: A semantic bias?Reading and Writing, 23, 589–605. doi:10.1007/s11145-010-9228-0
47. M.A.WilsonS.JoubertP.FerréS.BellevilleA.I.AnsaldoY.JoanetteS.M.. Brambati (2012). The role of the left anterior temporal lobe in exception word reading: Reconciling patient and neuroimaging findings. NeuroImage, 60, 2000–2007. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.02.009
48. A.M.WoollamsM.A.Lambon RalphD.C.PlautK.Patterson (2007). SD-squared: On the association between semantic dementia and surface dyslexia. Psychological Review, 114, 316–339. doi:10.1037/a0017641