Phonological recoding and lexical access

Davelaar, Eileen; Coltheart, Max; Besner, Derek; Jónasson, Jón Torfi

doi:10.3758/bf03197471

Cited by 206 publications

(179 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

172

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although at the very preliminary stage of children's "word reading," (written) word recognition may be based on rote learning, linguistic guessing, or salient visual features (e.g., Frith, 1985;Seymour & Elder, 1986), this stage is very short or is skipped altogether (Stuart & Coltheart, 1988). Thus, although most investigators agree that at the early stages of skill acquisition, access to meaning is based on assembled phonology, dual-route models (e.g., Baron, 1973;Davelaar, Coltheart, Besner, & Jonasson, 1978;Frederiksen & Kroll, 1976) assume that the acquisition of word reading skill results in additional representational codes and that, in skilled readers, the output of phonological mediation is delayed relative to the output of direct access (but see Frost, Repp, & Katz, 1988;Perfetti, Bell, & Delaney, 1988, for a contrasting view). Therefore, skilled readers can bypass the phonological route; whereas beginners must rely on phonological mediation (Baron & Baron, 1977).…”

Section: Access To Meaningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unintentional word reading via the phonological route: The Stroop effect with cross-script homophones.

Tzelgov

Henik²,

Sneg³

et al. 1996

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Single-route theories that argue that access to meaning is always mediated by phonology are consistent with process theories of automaticity. Dual-route theories, suggesting that reading skill results in direct access, are consistent with the notion of automaticity as memory retrieval. If word reading reflects memory retrieval, the Stroop effect should be absent in the absence of cues normally serving for retrieval. The Stroop effect was obtained in Hebrew-English bilinguals for cross-script homophones, which have meaning as color names in one language but are written in a script of the other language. The Stroop effect in cross-script homophones was independent of response mode and was insensitive to color-related proportion, supporting the assumption of different routes being involved in access to meaning of regular words and cross-script homophones. Implications for automaticity, theories of word reading, and knowledge representation by bilinguals are discussed.Reading is a cognitive skill that most humans acquire early and use extensively during their lives. The term word reading, as used by us, refers to mapping from strings of graphemes (i.e., written words) to meaning, when such strings are presented in isolation. Because extensive practice leads to automatic processing (Logan, 1988a), most investigators agree that word reading, at least in skilled readers, is an automatic process. In this article we analyze word reading from the viewpoint of approaches to automaticity.Our study has implications for theories of automaticity on the one hand and for theories of word reading on the other. In addition, because of the special kinds of stimuli we used, our findings are also relevant to the issue of knowledge representation by bilinguals. Approaches to AutomaticityAutomatic processing in general, and skilled word reading in particular, may be performed in two modes. Jacoby, Levy, and

show abstract

Section: Access To Meaningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unintentional word reading via the phonological route: The Stroop effect with cross-script homophones.

Tzelgov

Henik²,

Sneg³

et al. 1996

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For common words, a decision may be possible largely on the basis of visual characteristics; however, less common words may require an extensive phonological checking procedure. A similar explanation might be made on the basis of Coltheart's (1978) dual-route model-namely, that a decision based purely on accessing the lexicon might be possible for common words, but, for low-frequency words, for which lexical access is less rapid, decisions are made on the basis of assembled phonological recoding. We shall return to this idea in the General Discussion.…”

Section: Experiments 2-5mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If all the nonwords in a LDT sound identical to real words, the use ofassembled (or sublexical) phonological recoding will generate representations that will, confusingly, match those of real words. Thus, the use of pseudohomophones should encourage participants to abandon reliance on assembled phonology (Davelaar et al, 1978). Furthermore, if the AoA effect observed in Experiment 1 was due to the use ofassembled phonology, its effect should be diminished by the use of pseudohomophones.…”

Section: Experiments 2-5mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is incontestable that, if all the nonwords used in the task are orthographically legal (and so are pronounceable), successful performance in the LDT requires that words gain access to their lexical representations. However, it is now considered unlikely that the task taps only the processes necessary for lexical access; indeed, there exists considerable evidence to suggest that performance in the task is influenced by both semantic variables, such as concreteness (see, e.g., Kroll & Merves, 1986), and phonological variables (e.g., Besner & Davelaar, 1983;Cotheart, Davelaar, Jonasson, & Besner, 1977;Davelaar, Coltheart, Besner, & Jonasson, 1978;Rubenstein et al, 1971;Seidenberg, Petersen, MacDonald, & Plaut, 1996). Coltheart et al (1977) proposed the dual-route model of reading, wherein a written word is processed in two possible ways: by a direct (or visual) route, which matches the visual input to an orthographic lexical entry, or by a slower phonologically mediated route.…”

Section: Are Effects Of Aoa In the Ldt Dependent On The Retrieval Of mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Age of acquisition, word frequency, and the role of phonology in the lexical decision task

1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In five experiments, we examined the respective roles of word age of acquisition (AoA) and frequency in the lexical decision task The two variables were manipulated orthogonally (while controlling for concreteness and length) in fully factorial designs. Experiment 1 was a conventional lexical decision task, and Experiments 2-5 involved various attempts to interfere with reliance upon phonology. In Experiment 2, only orthographically illegal nonwords were used; in Experiment 3, pseudohomophone nonwords; in Experiment 4, articulatory suppression by the recitation of a nursery rhyme; and in Experiment 5, articulatory suppression by the repetition of a single word. The same basic pattern of results was observed in all experiments: There were main effects of both AoAand frequency, which interacted in such a way that the AoAeffect was larger for low-than for high-frequency words. Although the AoAeffect was reduced by manipulations intended to interfere with phonological processing, the manipulations did not eliminate the effect. The results are discussed in terms of current models of reading in which it is proposed that AoAhas its primary effect on the retrieval of lexical phonology, which appears to be consulted automatically in the lexical decision task A recently growing body of research has been focused on the attempt to separate the effects ofage ofacquisition (AoA) and word frequency in lexical processing tasks. The two variables are correlated, since words acquired early in life tend to occur commonly in adulthood. Recent studies have been concerned with the possibility that the very many reported effects of frequency might be confounded with the effects of AoA. The effects of AoA have been demonstrated in studies of picture naming la-

show abstract

“…The experiments included manipulations of word frequency, the type of nonwords (nonword lexicality, e.g., Davelaar, Coltheart, Besner, & Jonasson, 1978;James, 1975;Shulman & Davison, 1977), the proportion of high-versus low-frequency words, and repetition of words and nonwords. The effects of these manipulations have been targets for modeling lexical access, so they were chosen to allow examination of how their effects can be interpreted through the decision process in the diffusion model.…”

Section: Overview Of the Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Diffusion Model Account of the Lexical Decision Task.

Ratcliff¹,

Gómez²,

McKoon³

2004

Psychological Review

510

675

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The diffusion model for 2-choice decisions (R. Ratcliff, 1978) was applied to data from lexical decision experiments in which word frequency, proportion of high-versus low-frequency words, and type of nonword were manipulated. The model gave a good account of all of the dependent variables -accuracy, correct and error response times, and their distributions-and provided a description of how the component processes involved in the lexical decision task were affected by experimental variables. All of the variables investigated affected the rate at which information was accumulated from the stimuli-called drift rate in the model. The different drift rates observed for the various classes of stimuli can all be explained by a 2-dimensional signal-detection representation of stimulus information. The authors discuss how this representation and the diffusion model's decision process might be integrated with current models of lexical access.The lexical decision task is one of the most widely used paradigms in psychology. The goal of the research described in this article was to account for lexical decision performance with the diffusion model (Ratcliff, 1978), a model that allows components of cognitive processing to be examined in two-choice decision tasks. Nine lexical decision experiments, manipulating a number of factors known to affect lexical decision performance, are presented. The diffusion model gives good fits to the data from all of the experiments, including mean response times for correct and error responses, the relative speeds of correct and error responses, the distributions of response times, and accuracy rates.In the diffusion model, the mechanism underlying two-choice decisions is the accumulation of noisy information from a stimulus over time. Information accumulates toward one or the other of two decision criteria until one of the criteria is reached; then the response associated with that criterion is initiated. In the lexical decision task, one of the criteria is associated with a word response, the other with a nonword response. The rate with which information is accumulated is called drift rate, and it depends on the quality of information from the stimulus. In lexical decision, some stimuli are more wordlike than others, and so their rate of accumulation of information toward the word criterion is faster; other stimuli, such as random letter strings, are so un-wordlike that information accumulates quickly toward the nonword criterion. For the nine experiments presented below, the drift rates can be summarized quite simply. First, the ordering of the drift rates from largest to smallest is as follows: high-frequency words, low-frequency words, very low-frequency words, pseudowords, and random letter NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript strings. Second, the differences among the drift rates are larger when the nonwords in an experiment are pseudowords than when they are random letter strings.For our framework, Figure 1 outlines the relationships among...

show abstract

Phonological recoding and lexical access

Cited by 206 publications

References 13 publications

Unintentional word reading via the phonological route: The Stroop effect with cross-script homophones.

Unintentional word reading via the phonological route: The Stroop effect with cross-script homophones.

Age of acquisition, word frequency, and the role of phonology in the lexical decision task

A Diffusion Model Account of the Lexical Decision Task.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About