Lexical neighborhood effects in pseudoword spelling

Abstract

The general aim of this study is to contribute to a better understanding of the cognitive processes that underpin skilled adult spelling. More specifically, it investigates the influence of lexical neighbors on pseudo-word spelling with the goal of providing a more detailed account of the interaction between lexical and sublexical sources of knowledge in spelling. In prior research examining this topic, adult participants typically heard lists composed of both words and pseudo-words and had to make a lexical decision to each stimulus before writing the pseudo-words. However, these priming paradigms are susceptible to strategic influence and may therefore not give a clear picture of the processes normally engaged in spelling unfamiliar words. In our two Experiments involving 71 French-speaking literate adults, only pseudo-words were presented which participants were simply requested to write to dictation using the first spelling that came to mind. Unbeknownst to participants, pseudo-words varied according to whether they did or did not have a phonological word neighbor. Results revealed that low-probability phoneme/grapheme mappings (e.g., /o/ -> aud in French) were used significantly more often in spelling pseudo-words with a close phonological lexical neighbor with that spelling (e.g., /krepo/ derived from “crapaud,” /krapo/) than in spelling pseudo-words with no close neighbors (e.g., /frøpo/). In addition, the strength of this lexical influence increased with the lexical frequency of the word neighbors as well as with their degree of phonetic overlap with the pseudo-word targets. These results indicate that information from lexical and sublexical processes is integrated in the course of spelling, and a specific theoretical account as to how such integration may occur is introduced.

Lexical Influences on the Sublexical System during Nonword Spelling

“…Additionally, we found that more target spellings were produced for nonwords having low enemies than those having high enemies across prime and control conditions. While previous work has found an influence of word neighbors on nonword spelling, only the influence of "friends" was examined [19]. We extended these findings to the influence of word enemies and the influence of the frequency of word neighbors…”

“…The work of Tainturier et al [19] suggests that a lexical influence on the operation of the sublexical system may be a result of the activation of the spellings of word neighbors upon the aural presentation of a nonword. Those spellings are more likely to be selected to spell the nonword.…”

“…Accordingly, what we have been calling priming effects may actually be a result of the increased activation of the prime word, a neighbor of the nonword, making it more likely that the prime word's spelling influences how the nonword is spelled and not other mechanisms. We extended the work of Tainturier et al [19], who only examined the influence of words with the same target spelling as the nonword (friends), to examine the role that lexical friends and enemies play in nonword spelling. If word neighbors influence the spelling of nonwords, we would expect to see an influence of friends and/or enemies on nonword spelling.…”

“…The most highly activated letters, determined from the activation of letters involved in neighbor spellings and in activation from the P-G system, will be more likely to be selected to spell the subsequently presented nonword [19]. When those letters are different from those in the target spelling, that would result in fewer target spellings of the nonword.…”

“…Tainturier, et al [19] found that the activation of phonological word neighbors also influences nonword spellings. They found that French nonwords were spelled more often using lowprobability P-G correspondences when the nonwords had a close phonological neighbor to the target spelling that included the low probability P-G correspondence than for those without a close phonological neighbor.…”