CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 67

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Letter-transposition effects are not universal: The impact of transposing letters in Hebrew

Velan, Hadas, Frost, Ram·2009·Journal of Memory and Language
DOI 10.1016/j.jml.2009.05.003PMC PMC2748959
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jml.2009.05.003

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 55

  1. Acha, 2008, The effect of neighborhood frequency in reading: Evidence with transposed-letter neighbors, Cognition, 108, 290, 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.02.006 · DOI
  2. Christianson, 2005, Letter transpositions within and across morphemes, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1327, 10.1037/0278-7393.31.6.1327 · DOI
  3. Coltheart, 2001, DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud, Psychological Review, 108, 204, 10.1037/0033-295X.108.1.204 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Davis, C. J. (1999). The self-organizing lexical acquisition and recognition (SOLAR) model of visual word recognition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of New South Wales.
  5. Davis, 2006, Masked inhibitory priming in English: Evidence for lexical inhibition, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 668, 10.1037/0096-1523.32.3.668 · DOI
  6. De Moor, 2000, Neighborhood-frequency effects when primes and targets are of different lengths, Psychological Research, 63, 159, 10.1007/PL00008174 · DOI
  7. Deutsch, 1998, Verbs and nouns are organized and accessed differently in the mental lexicon: Evidence from Hebrew, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1238, 10.1037/0278-7393.24.5.1238 · DOI
  8. Deutsch, 2003, Early morphological effects in reading: Evidence from parafoveal preview benefit in Hebrew, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 415, 10.3758/BF03196500 · DOI
  9. Deutsch, 2000, Early morphological effects in word recognition in Hebrew: Evidence from parafoveal preview benefit, Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 487, 10.1080/01690960050119670 · DOI
  10. Deutsch, 2005, Morphological parafoveal preview benefit effects in reading: Evidence from Hebrew, Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 341, 10.1080/01690960444000115 · DOI
  11. Drews, 1995, Morphological and orthographic similarity in visual word recognition, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 1098, 10.1037/0096-1523.21.5.1098 · DOI
  12. Duñabeitia, 2007, Do transposed-letter similarity effects occur at a morpheme level? Evidence for ortho-morphological decomposition, Cognition, 105, 691, 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.12.001 · DOI
  13. Elman, 2004, An alternative view of the mental lexicon, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 301, 10.1016/j.tics.2004.05.003 · DOI
  14. Feldman, 1995, Decomposing words into their constituent morphemes: Evidence from English and Hebrew, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 947, 10.1037/0278-7393.21.4.947 · DOI
  15. Forster, 1987, Form priming with masked primes: The best match hypothesis, Vol. 12, 127
  16. Forster, 1984, Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 10, 680, 10.1037/0278-7393.10.4.680 · DOI
  17. Forster, 1987, Masked priming with graphemically related forms: Repetition or partial activation?, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 211, 10.1080/14640748708401785 · DOI
  18. Forster, 2003, DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 25, 116, 10.3758/BF03195503 · DOI
  19. Forster, 1994, Bodies, antibodies and neighborhood-density effects in masked form priming, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20, 844, 10.1037/0278-7393.20.4.844 · DOI
  20. Friedmann, 2001, Letter position dyslexia, Cognitive Neuropsychology, 18, 673, 10.1080/02643290143000051 · DOI
  21. Friedmann, 2005, Letter form as a constraint for errors in neglect dyslexia and letter position dyslexia, Behavioural Neurology, 16, 145, 10.1155/2005/635634 · DOI
  22. Frost, R., & Velan, H. (2008, November). Processing morphologically complex and morphologically simple words in Hebrew: Evidence for two independent lexical systems. Paper presented at the 49th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Chicago, IL. · DOI
  23. Frost, 2003, Are phonological effects fragile? The effect of luminance and exposure duration on form priming and phonological priming, Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 346, 10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00510-7 · DOI
  24. Frost, 2000, Decomposing morphologically complex words in a nonlinear morphology, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition, 26, 751, 10.1037/0278-7393.26.3.751 · DOI
  25. Frost, 2000, Morphological priming: Dissociation of phonological, semantic, and morphological factors, Memory & Cognition, 28, 1277, 10.3758/BF03211828 · DOI
  26. Frost, 1997, What can we learn from the morphology of Hebrew: A masked priming investigation of morphological representation, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition, 23, 829, 10.1037/0278-7393.23.4.829 · DOI
  27. Frost, 2005, Orthographic structure versus morphological structure: Principles of lexical organization in a given language, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 31, 1293, 10.1037/0278-7393.31.6.1293 · DOI
  28. Grainger, 2008, Cracking the orthographic code: An introduction, Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 1, 10.1080/01690960701578013 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Grainger, 1991, Masked morphological priming in visual word recognition, Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 370, 10.1016/0749-596X(91)90042-I · DOI
  30. Grainger, 2006, Letter position information and printed word perception: The relative-position priming constraint, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 865, 10.1037/0096-1523.32.4.865 · DOI
  31. Grainger, 2004, Does the huamn mnid raed wrods as a wlohe?, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 58, 10.1016/j.tics.2003.11.006 · DOI
  32. Guerrera, 2008, Masked form priming with extreme transposition, Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 117, 10.1080/01690960701579722 · DOI
  33. Harm, 2003, Modeling the successes and failures of interventions for disabled readers, Scientific Studies of Reading, 7, 155, 10.1207/S1532799XSSR0702_3 · DOI
  34. Harm, 2004, Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes, Psychological Review, 111, 662, 10.1037/0033-295X.111.3.662 · DOI
  35. Lupker, 2008, Transposed-letter effects: Consonants, vowels and letter frequency, Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 93, 10.1080/01690960701579714 · DOI
  36. McClelland, 1981, An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1An account of basic findings, Psychological Review, 88, 375, 10.1037/0033-295X.88.5.375 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Nakayama, 2008, Masked priming with orthographic neighbors: A test of the lexical competition assumption, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1236, 10.1037/0096-1523.34.5.1236 · DOI
  38. Norris, 2006, The Bayesian reader: Explaining word recognition as an optimal Bayesian decision process, Psychological Review, 113, 327, 10.1037/0033-295X.113.2.327 · DOI
  39. Norris, 2008, Perception as evidence accumulation and Bayesian inference: Insights from masked priming, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 434, 10.1037/a0012799 · DOI
  40. Perea, 2006, Do transposed-letter similarity effects occur at a prelexical phonological level?, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1600, 10.1080/17470210500298880 · DOI
  41. Perea, 2006, Do transposed-letter similarity effects occur at a syllable level?, Experimental Psychology, 53, 308, 10.1027/1618-3169.53.4.308 · DOI
  42. Perea, 2008, Do orthotactics and phonology constrain the transposed-letter effect?, Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 69, 10.1080/01690960701578146 · DOI
  43. Perea, 2003, Does jugde activate COURT? Transposed-letter similarity effects in masked associative priming, Memory & Cognition, 31, 829, 10.3758/BF03196438 · DOI
  44. Perea, 2004, Can CANISO activate CASINO? Transposed-letter similarity effects with nonadjacent letter positions, Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 231, 10.1016/j.jml.2004.05.005 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Perea, 2009, Beyond alphabetic orthographies: The role of form and phonology in transposition effects in Katakana, Language and Cognitive Processes, 24, 67, 10.1080/01690960802053924 · DOI
  46. Peressotti, 1999, The role of letter identity and letter position in orthographic priming, Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 691, 10.3758/BF03205539 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Rayner, 2006, Raeding wrods with jubmled lettrs: There’s a cost, Psychological Science, 17, 192, 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01684.x · DOI
  48. Rueckl, 2002, The dynamics of visual word recognition, Ecological Psychology, 14, 5, 10.1207/S15326969ECO1401&2double_2 · DOI
  49. Schoonbaert, 2004, Letter position coding in printed word perception: Effects of repeated and transposed letters, Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 333, 10.1080/01690960344000198 · DOI · Paper page
  50. Segui, 1990, Priming word recognition with orthographic neighbors: Effects of relative prime-target frequency, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 65, 10.1037/0096-1523.16.1.65 · DOI
  51. Van Orden, 1994, Interdependence of form and function in cognitive systems explains perception of printed words, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 1269, 10.1037/0096-1523.20.6.1269 · DOI
  52. Velan, 2007, Cambridge University vs. Hebrew University: The impact of letter transposition on reading English and Hebrew, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 913, 10.3758/BF03194121 · DOI
  53. Velan, 2005, The processing of root morphemes in Hebrew: Contrasting localist and distributed accounts, Language and Cognitive Processes, 29, 169, 10.1080/01690960444000214 · DOI
  54. Whitney, 2001, How the brain encodes the order of letters in a printed word: The SERIOL model and selective literature review, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 221, 10.3758/BF03196158 · DOI · Paper page
  55. Whitney, 2008, Supporting the serial in the SERIOL model, Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 824, 10.1080/01690960701828202 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 67

Metadata

Authors
Velan, H., & Frost, R.
Venue
Journal of Memory and Language
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-10
Volume
61
Issue
3
Pages
285-302
ISSN
0749-596X
DOI
10.1016/j.jml.2009.05.003
PMC
PMC2748959
Cited by
67
References
3
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review