Case effects in letter-name matching: A partial replication

Boles, David B.; Hellige, Joseph B.

doi:10.3758/bf03333750

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These estimates are consistent with the estimate of less than 100 msec for the time course of generation, derived independently from the disparity in mixed-case and purecase RTs. Indeed, in Boles and Eveland (1983) and Boles and Hellige (1984), the disparity between stimulus types averaged 61 msec, a figure that shows remarkable agreement with the currently estimated 67-msec completion time for fast generation.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 66%

“…Thus, no evidence was found for the use of phonetic representations in mixed-ease letter matching. Other work has come to the same conclusion (Besner, Coltheart, & Davelaar, 1984;Boles, 1986;Boles & Hellige, 1984;Carrasco, Kinchla, & Figueroa, 1988).…”

supporting

confidence: 51%

“…Having established the success of one specific model, the research then investigates the chronometrics of the generation process. On an a priori basis, this type of generation must be very fast, for mixed-ease letter pairs are matched at latencies that are typically less than 100 msec longer than the latencies for pure-case letter pairs (Boles & Eveland, 1983;Boles & Hellige, 1984;Posner, 1978). Since pure-ease pairs do not require generation, it seems reasonable to expect that generation can be accomplished in less than 100 msec, with some indeterminacy due to other potential disparities in the processes involved.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Fast visual generation: Its nature and chronometrics

Boles

1992

Perception & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The fast-generation model for the matching of mixed-case letter pairs (e.g., Aa, Ab) states that one or both members of a pair activate visual representations in memory of the opposite case, supporting "same" or "different" responses through crossmatching to representations of the pair members themselves. Here the reaction time and error results ofthree experiments using simultaneous matches support a specific variant of the model in which generation proceeds from the uppercase letter. Furthermore, a manipulation of stimulus onset asynchrony in a fourth experiment using near-simultaneous matches indicates that fast generation produces a visual representation that occurs within 67 msec of initiation and that decays within 200 msec. A fifth experiment contrasts simultaneous and successive matches and in the case of successive matches finds evidence in support of a regeneration process acting after an initial decay. Models of mixed-case matching that are based on the phonetic representation ofletter names, or on abstract-letter identities, completely fail to account for the results. Fast generation is distinguishable from slow generation in that it shows fast (vs. slow) dynamics, rapid decay (vs. maintainability), no imagery (vs. imagery), and (probably) automatic (vs. controlled) processing.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 66%

supporting

confidence: 51%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fast visual generation: Its nature and chronometrics

Boles

1992

Perception & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to Posner (1978), the name code proposed by Posner and Mitchell (1967) should be equated with a phonological representation which, in the letter matching task, would obviously permit participants to decide that NI letter pairs (e.g., A–a) have the same name. This hypothesis has been challenged however, by the demonstration that the name equivalence of physically different letters can be established without phonological coding (Boles & Eveland, 1983; Rynard & Besner, 1987; for relevant evidence see also Besner, Coltheart, & Davelaar, 1984; Boles, 1986; Boles & Hellige, 1984; Carrasco et al, 1988; Parks & Kroll, 1975). Two apparently equally viable accounts have therefore been presented as alternatives to the phonological code for the process by which an abstract representation of letter identities may be derived.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Priming and response selection processes in letter classification and identification tasks.

Arguin¹,

Bub²

1995

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The processing of isolated visual letters was studied by means of a priming paradigm. In alphabetic (letter vs. nonletter) classification, any letter prime reduced response times to letter targets. Additional facilitation occurred only with primes physically identical to the target. In letter naming, facilitation was seen with primes nominally identical to the target even when they were physically different. This result is not due to phonological priming because phonologically similar primes had no effect on naming times. Primes nominally different from the target but physically similar to it increased naming times. The classification task seems to be performed through the global monitoring of stored visual knowledge of letters. In contrast, the absolute identification of letters appears to rest on a signal-to-noise statistic derived from an abstract encoding of letter identities. Connectionist simulations provide support for these proposals.

show abstract