Detection of letter repetition in words and nonwords: the effect of opposite-case distractors.

This study tested whether it is the repetition of the letter's name and not its shape that is detected faster in a word than in a nonword (Krueger, 1989). Ss judged whether the same letter shape or the same letter name was repeated in a 6-letter word or nonword. When the shape was repeated, the word advantage was nearly as large (about 50 ms) when Ss looked for a physical match as when they looked for a name match. When the 2 repeated letters differed in case, however, the word advantage was very large (208 ms) when Ss looked for a name match and were thus rewarded for nonvisual coding, but the advantage vanished ((-35)-ms word deficit) when Ss looked for a physical match and were thus penalized for nonvisual coding. This indicates that letter names are much more accessible in words than in nonwords, and that words are primarily encoded nonvisually.     

Orthographic redundancy in letter recognition: Orthographic neighbourhood or orthographic context?

Abstract

In explaining the word-superiority effect (i.e. the better detection of a letter in a word than in a nonword), the Interactive Activation Model (IAM) of McClelland and Rumelhart (1981) and the Fuzzy Logical Model of Perception (FLMP) of Massaro (1979) emphasise the importance of orthographic redundancy (i.e. the regularities of letters within words) in different ways. In the IAM, orthographic redundancy is defined by the number of “friends”; that is, words sharing the same letters except one with the word containing the target letter. Such friends constitute the orthographic “neighbourhood”. FLMP stresses the orthographic “context”; that is, the similarity of the word with a representation in the lexicon. The orthographic neighbourhood and context are manipulated independently in Experiment 1, and the findings are better understood in terms of the orthographic neighbourhood. By increasing the number of friends in nonwords, better letter detection is also obtained in nonwords as compared with letter detection in random letter strings (Experiment 2). These findings, together with the position effects obtained, are more clearly in agreement with the IAM than with the FLMP.     

Detection of intraword and interword letter repetition: A test of the word unitization hypothesis

Do words, as familiar units or gestalts, tend to swallow up and conceal their letter components (Pillsbury, 1897)? Letters typically are detected faster and more accurately in words than in nonwords (i.e., scrambled collections of letters), and in more frequent words than in less frequent words. However, a word advantage at encoding, where the representation of the string is formed, might compensate for, and thus mask, a word disadvantage at decoding and comparison, where the component letters of the representation are accessed and compared with the target letter. To better reveal any such word disadvantage, a task was used in this study that increased the amount of letter processing. Subjects judged whether a letter was repeated within a six-letter word or a nonword (Experiment 1; intraword letter repetition) or was repeated between two adjacent unrelated six-letter words or nonwords (Experiment 2; interword letter repetition). Contrary to Pillsbury's word unitization hypothesis, both types of letter repetition (intraword and interword) were detected faster and just as accurately with words as with nonwords. In Experiment 2, however, interword letter repetition was detected less accurately on common words (but not on rare words or third-order pseudowords) than on the corresponding nonwords. Thus, although the familiar word does not deny access to its own component letters, it does make their comparison with letters from other words more difficult.     

On time differences in searching for letters in words and nonwords: Do they emerge during the initial encoding or the subsequent scan?

Krueger (1970a, 1970b, 1982) has demonstrated that subjects can search for target letters within words faster than they can complete an equivalent search through nonwords, and he further demonstrated that the effect did not arise during the comparison stage. The present study involved three experiments in which the usual word advantage disappeared either when subjects knew where within a display the target item would appear (i.e., it was always the first letter), or when all the component letters were encoded into memory before the task began (i.e., a memory-search task). These data, in conjunction with Krueger's, where interpreted as localizing at least one (and possibly the only) source of the word-nonword difference in this task to the events that occur during the item-to-item transitions subjects make when scanning the letter arrays. That is, these transitions are faster for words than nonwords, and it was suggested that the time difference may emerge because although all the letters from within a word appear to be available in memory before the scan begins, this seems not to be true for consonant arrays. Given that this is the case, part of the word-nonword difference may be attributable to subsequent encoding events that would be needed for the consonant arrays as the scan moves from letter to letter.     

The word without the tachistoscope

In experiments with an unlimited viewing time, we were able to isolate specific stimulus factors that lead to the word-superiority effect. We discovered that advantages of words over nonwords, and words over single letters, are caused by different factors. The word-nonword effect was found in a variety of circumstances, such as with small type, low contrast, or a simultaneously present mask. The advantage of words over single letters occurs only when the stimuli are embedded in a mask making it difficult to find a single letter. In addition, we obtained a word-detection effect without a brief exposure: Subjects were more accurate detecting the presence of words than nonwords. However, this effect only occurred when subjects were required to discriminate letters from nonletters. Thus, the word-superiority (word-nonword difference) and word-detection effects both involve letter discrimination and can be explained by similar mechanisms.     

Temporal separation of two part-letter arrays and size changes in a nonmasking work-superiority effect

In two experiments subjects were asked to report the identity of a position-cued critical letter in an array of four letters. Four types of arrays were used: (i) unpronounceable nonwords; (ii) pronounceable nonwords ('pseudowords'); (iii) words in which the critical letter was minimally constrained by the context letters; and (iv) words in which the critical letter was maximally constrained by the context letters. All four-letter stimuli were presented in two parts. A leading array in which the information from two quadrants of a vertical by horizontal division of each letter was presented, and, after intervals of 0, 20, 40, 80, 100, 120, 160, 320, and 480 ms and infinity (ie, no trailing array), a trailing array of the complementary letter parts. In experiment 1 a single group of eight subjects responded to the one hundred and sixty combinations of the four types of letter strings, the four serial positions, and the ten stimulus onset asynchrony values. In experiment 2 the stimulus onset asynchrony values were varied among subjects, with twelve subjects responding at each value. The results from these two studies were generally similar. Performance in the word conditions was consistently superior to performance in the nonword conditions, and the magnitude of this difference (ie, the word-superiority effect) increased with increasing stimulus onset asynchrony up to 120 ms, and then gradually declined. The fact that the magnitude of the word-superiority effect initially increased with the separation of leading and trailing arrays was interpreted as support for Johnston's suggestion that letters in words are represented during visual encoding both in the form of individual letter percepts and in a decay-resistant word percept, as opposed to letters in nonwords, which are represented only as decay-susceptible letter percepts. The experimental findings are discussed in relation to the 'interactive activation' model of word perception.     

The word-detection effect: Sophisticated guessing or perceptual enhancement?

Subjects discriminate letters in words better than letters in nonwords. The sophisticated guessing hypothesis attributes this word advantage to a guessing strategy. In words, the possible letters at each letter position are constrained by letters at other positions, whereas letters in nonwords are not restricted in this manner. A critical test of this hypothesis is that if subjects are givenexplicit knowledge of the letters in nonwords before the trial, the word advantage would disappear. We investigated the effect of preknowledge of the alternatives in the word-detection effect. In the word-detection effect, subjects decide which of two character strings contains letters and which contains pseudoletters. In four experiments, subjects were more accurate with words than with nonwords, and subjects were more accurate when they were told the word or nonword before the trial. However, even with foreknowledge of the alternatives, subjects were more accurate with words than with nonwords.     

Some tests of the interactive-activation model for word identification

Summary The interactive-activation model postulates (a) that activation at the letter level leads automatically to activation at the word level, (b) that the word-superiority effect reflects reactivation of letters by the word they spell, and (c) that subjects identify words on the basis of information obtained from separate letter-position channels. In the first two experiments, we showed words in upper, lower, or mixed case: the word-superiority effect was reduced when words were presented in mixed-case letters, presumably because extra-letter information is lost with mixed-case presentation; i.e., postulate (c) is wrong. The third experiment showed that when the letters of a word are rotated 180° subjects can identify the letters without producing a word-superiority effect; i.e., one of postulates (a) and (b) is wrong. In Experiments 4 and 5, we trained subjects to name words presented in inverted letters; training was more effective when subjects could exploit bigram information in addition to letter-channel information; i.e., reading inverted text is based on extra-letter-feature information, not on a general skill in rotating letters. Taken together, our data deny three of the interactive-activation model's major postulates. We offer some suggestions for future versions of the model. Electronic mail: Userid: MEWHORTD; Nodeid: QUCDN; Domain: BITNET     

Phonological Activation in Multi-syllabic Sord Recognition

Three experiments were conducted to test the phonological recoding hypothesis in visual word recognition. Most studies on this issue have been conducted using mono-syllabic words, eventually constructing various models of phonological processing. Yet in many languages including English, the majority of words are multi-syllabic words. English includes words incorporating a silent letter in their letter strings (e.g., champane). Such words provide an opportunity for investigating the role of phonological information in multi-syllabic words by comparing them to words that do not have the silent letter in the corresponding position (e.g., passener). The performance focus is on the effects of removing letters from words with a silent letter and from words with a non-silent letter. Three representative lexical tasks—naming, semantic categorization, lexical decision—were conducted in the present study. Stimuli that excluded a silent letter (e.g., champa_ne) were processed faster than those that excluded a sounding letter (e.g., passen_er) in the naming (Experiment 1), the semantic categorization (Experiment 2), and the lexical decision task (Experiment 3). The convergent evidence from these three experiments provides seminal proof of phonological recoding in multi-syllabic word recognition. An erratum to this article can be found at     

Effects of targets embedded within words in a visual search task

Visual search performance can be negatively affected when both targets and distracters share a dimension relevant to the task. This study examined if visual search performance would be influenced by distracters that affect a dimension irrelevant from the task. In Experiment 1 within the letter string of a letter search task, target letters were embedded within a word. Experiment 2 compared targets embedded in words to targets embedded in nonwords. Experiment 3 compared targets embedded in words to a condition in which a word was present in a letter string, but the target letter, although in the letter string, was not embedded within the word. The results showed that visual search performance was negatively affected when a target appeared within a high frequency word. These results suggest that the interaction and effectiveness of distracters is not merely dependent upon common features of the target and distracters, but can be affected by word frequency (a dimension not related to the task demands).     

Contrasting effects of age of acquisition in lexical decision and letter detection

Two experiments studied attention in beginning and skilled readers of Dutch to letter information in function words and content words. Early and late acquired nouns and function words were presented to third-grade students and skilled adolescent readers. Target words were presented in short story contexts, as in the study of Greenberg, Koriat, and Vellutino (1998). Target nouns were matched on word frequency. Predictions of the structural account hypothesis of letter detection (Koriat, Greenberg, & Goldshmid, 1991) were confirmed. No age-of-acquisition effect was found. In contrast, a separately conducted lexical decision experiment using the same content word stimulus sets showed shorter decision latencies for early acquired words. The combined results suggest that during silent reading, when attention is focused on meaning, phonological processes may play a less prominent role than in lexical decision tasks that demand explicit control of phonological codes. The letter detection results confirmed predictions of the structural account hypothesis for both beginning and skilled readers. Taken together, these studies demonstrate that phonological processes in silent reading may play a less prominent role and that the structural account of letter processing is valid for languages other than Hebrew and English but probably is not the unique mechanism involved in letter detection.     

Test of the phonological recoding hypothesis using a letter-delay task

In some English words is a silent letter in the letter strings, e.g., PSALM. This type of word provides room to manipulate phonological similarity against the words with a nonsilent letter in the corresponding position, e.g., PASTA, to test the phonological recoding hypothesis. Letter strings excluding the silent letter or the sounding letter, e.g., _salm and a phonological condition, _asta as an orthographic condition, were presented. A "psalm-type word" was processed faster than pasta-type word," indicating that phonology plays a leading role in word recognition.     

An analysis of the word-superiority effect

It is easier to decide which of two letters was presented tachistoscopically if the critical letter was in a word rather than in a scrambled word. We showed that this word-superiority effect holds just as strongly for pronounceable nonwords as for words, even when the critical letters are constant over all trials. This finding rules out word meaning and familiarity as variables accounting for the effect. In addition, it was found that the superiority of pronounceable stimuli holds for two-letter stimuli as well as four, and it is therefore concluded that the effect is not due to a memory limitation. An explanation of the effect in terms of the use of additional acoustic information is ruled out by showing that the effect was not diminished when the two possible words sounded exactly alike. An experiment using correctly and incorrectly spelled chemical formulas suggested that spelling regularities, regardless of pronounceability per se, account for the superiority effect. Finally, when decisions about two critical letters must be made on each trial, the correlation between being correct on one and on the other is higher for pronounceable stimuli under some conditions.     

Phonological processing during silent reading in aphasic patients

In a task involving the detection of a predesignated letter during the silent reading of a series of passages, left-brain-damaged aphasic patients and right-brain-damaged patients showed patterns of performance consistent with those of normal individuals. Both of the brain-damaged groups were more likely to detect letters when they were pronounced in a typical way (e.g., g in "ago") than in an atypical way (e.g., g in "through"), suggesting the use of phonological recoding during silent reading. In addition, both of these groups were more likely to detect letters when they occurred in content than in function words, suggesting a differential processing of these word types. Possible differences in the strategies predominantly relied on for phonological recoding and for the differential processing of content and function words by different groups of patients are discussed.     

Can “words” be processed as integrated units?

Three experiments examined the information processing of letters embedded within one-syllable words and similar unpronounceable sequences. A speeded discrimination task was used to detect processing differences between words and nonwords in a situation where both the identity and position of critical display information was known to subjects before stimulus presentation. Results indicated that word pairs differing by two letters were more quickly discriminated than two words differing in a single letter, while nonword pairs differing in two letters were discriminated no faster than two nonwords differing in a single letter. A further comparison showed a performance advantage for words over nonwords in a condensation task that forced a scan of stimulus letters for correct responding. These results suggest that familiarity affects information processing at a perceptual level, and are incompatible with theories suggesting that familiarity effects are due to inferential factors following letter feature analysis.     

Familiarity affects visual processing of words.

While previous research has demonstrated that words can be processed more rapidly and/or more accurately than random strings of letters, it has not been convincingly demonstrated that the superior processing of words is a visual effect. In the present experiment, the cases of letters were manipulated in letter strings that were to be compared on the basis of physical identity. Mean response time was shorter for words than for nonwords even for pairs of letter strings that differed only in case (e.g., site-site). This finding implies that the advantage of words over nonwords (the familiarity effect) typically observed in the simultaneous matching task is not due solely to comparison of either the word names or the letter names and, thus, that at least part of the familiarity effect must be due to more rapid formation and/or comparison of visual representations of the two letter strings when they are words. Further analysis failed to reveal a significant involvement of phonemic or lexical codes in the comparison judgments.     

Neuropsychological evidence for case-specific reading: Multi-letter units in visual word recognition

We describe a patient (GK) who shows symptoms associated with Balint's syndrome and attentional dyslexia. GK was able to read words, but not nonwords. He also made many misidentification and mislocation errors when reporting letters in words, suggesting that his word-naming ability did not depend upon preserved position-coded, letter identification. We show that GK was able to read lower-case words better than upper-case words, but upper-case abbreviations better than lower-case abbreviations. Spacing the letters in abbreviations disrupted identification, as did mixing the case of letters within words. These data cannot be explained in terms of letter-based reading or preserved holistic word recognition. We propose that GK was sensitive to the visual familiarity of adjacent letter forms.     

The word-superiority effect does not require a T-scope.

Six experiments examined the possibility of obtaining a word-superiority effect (WSE) without the use of brief stimulus exposures or a poststimulus mask. In each experiment, subjects were presented a stimulus string and two alternative strings that differed by a single letter (Reicher, 1969). The alternatives and stimulus remained in view until subjects responded, and subjects were under no pressure to respond quickly. In Experiments 1-3, the stimuli were presented in very small type so that they were difficult to see. Subjects were significantly more accurate with words than with nonwords, letters embedded among digits, or letters embedded among number signs (#s). In Experiments 4 and 5, the stimuli were embedded in a simultaneously present pattern mask. Subjects were significantly more accurate with words than with single letters by themselves. In the final experiment, the stimuli were presented in a mask with specific spatial frequency characteristics, and performance was significantly better with words than with nonwords. The WSE is a more general phenomenon than previously supposed; it is not limited to a tachistoscopic exposure.     

Letter names and phonological awareness help children to learn letter-sound relations

Two experimental training studies with Portuguese-speaking preschoolers in Brazil were conducted to investigate whether children benefit from letter name knowledge and phonological awareness in learning letter-sound relations. In Experiment 1, two groups of children were compared. The experimental group was taught the names of letters whose sounds occur either at the beginning (e.g., the letter /be/) or in the middle (e.g., the letter /‘eli/) of the letter name. The control group was taught the shapes of the letters but not their names. Then both groups were taught the sounds of the letters. Results showed an advantage for the experimental group, but only for beginning-sound letters. Experiment 2 investigated whether training in phonological awareness could boost the learning of letter sounds, particularly middle-sound letters. In addition to learning the names of beginning- and middle-sound letters, children in the experimental group were taught to categorize words according to rhyme and alliteration, whereas controls were taught to categorize the same words semantically. All children were then taught the sounds of the letters. Results showed that children who were given phonological awareness training found it easier to learn letter sounds than controls. This was true for both types of letters, but especially for middle-sound letters.     

The word-superiority effect does not require a T-scope

Six experiments examined the possibility of obtaining a word-superiority effect (WSE) without the use of brief stimulus exposures or a poststimulus mask. In each experiment, subjects were presented a stimulus string and two alternative strings that differed by a single letter (Reicher, 1969). The alternatives and stimulus remained in view until subjects responded, and subjects were under no pressure to respond quickly. In Experiments 1–3, the stimuli were presented in very small type so that they were difficult to see. Subjects were significantly more accurate with words than with nonwords, letters embedded among digits, or letters embedded among number signs (#s). In Experiments 4 and 5, the stimuli were embedded in a simultaneously present pattern mask. Subjects were significantly more accurate with words than with single letters by themselves. In the final experiment, the stimuli were presented in a mask with specific spatial frequency characteristics, and performance was significantly better with words than with nonwords. The WSE is a more general phenomenon than previously supposed; it is not limited to a tachistoscopic exposure.