Cited by 407Reading and Literacy DevelopmentVisual perception and processing mechanismsNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism

The overlap model: A model of letter position coding.

Open access
Gomez, Pablo, Ratcliff, Roger, Perea, Manuel·2008·Psychological Review

Abstract

Recent research has shown that letter identity and letter position are not integral perceptual dimensions (e.g., jugde primes judge in word-recognition experiments). Most comprehensive computational models of visual word recognition (e.g., the interactive activation model, J. L. McClelland & D. E. Rumelhart, 1981, and its successors) assume that the position of each letter within a word is perfectly encoded. Thus, these models are unable to explain the presence of effects of letter transposition (trial-trail), letter migration (beard-bread), repeated letters (moose-mouse), or subset/superset effects (faulty-faculty). The authors extend R. Ratcliff's (1981) theory of order relations for encoding of letter positions and show that the model can successfully deal with these effects. The basic assumption is that letters in the visual stimulus have distributions over positions so that the representation of one letter will extend into adjacent letter positions. To test the model, the authors conducted a series of forced-choice perceptual identification experiments. The overlap model produced very good fits to the empirical data, and even a simplified 2-parameter model was capable of producing fits for 104 observed data points with a correlation coefficient of .91.

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 · 10.1037/a0012667

Cites

91 of 91 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Open-bigram coding is only one possible implementation; replacing it with another scheme would not harm the approach if the new mechanism is flexible and maximizes diagnostic information under visibility constraints.

    “Replacing this mechanism with an alternative coding scheme (e.g., Gomez et al., 2008) would not be detrimental to our approach, as long as the new mechanism exhibits the key properties of flexibility, and maximizing the use of diagnostic information given constraints in letter visibility.”

    From A Dual-Route Approach to Orthographic Processing (2011) · cites this paper as Gomez et al., 2008

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 92 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Davis CJ The self-organizing lexical acquisition and recognition (SOLAR) model of visual word recognition Dissertation Abstracts International 1999 62 01 594B
  2. Davis CJ When knowing what is not the same as knowing where Australian Journal of Psychology 2002 54 54
  3. Ratcliff R Order information and distributed memory models Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society 1987 474 486 Erlbaum Hillsdale, NJ

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gomez, P., Ratcliff, R., & Perea, M.
Venue
Psychological Review
Published
2008
Volume
115
Issue
3
Pages
577-600
ISSN
  • 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1471
OpenAlex
W1973816319
Cited by
405
References
92
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 35
FWCI
42.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R37-MH44640; K05-MH01891)
  • Spanish Ministry of Education and Science (SEJ2005-05205/EDU)
  • National Science Foundation (SES-0446869)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Keywords
overlap model, letter position coding, visual word recognition, letter transposition, order relations, perceptual identification, interactive activation model, letter identity
MeSH terms
Cognition, Humans, Phonetics, Visual Perception, Vocabulary, Recognition, Psychology

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