Cited by 221

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Letter position coding in printed word perception: Effects of repeated and transposed letters

Schoonbaert, Sofie, Grainger, Jonathan·2004·Language and Cognitive Processes

Abstract

We report four experiments investigating the effects of repeated and transposed letters in orthographic processing. Orthographically related primes were formed by removing one letter from the target word, by transposing two adjacent letters, or by replacing two adjacent letters with different letters. Robust masked priming in a lexical decision task was found for primes formed by removing a single letter (e.g., mircle-MIRACLE), and this was not influenced by whether or not the prime contained a letter repetition (e.g., balace vs. balnce as a prime for BALANCE ). Target words containing a repeated letter tended to be harder to respond to than words without a letter repetition, but the nonwords formed by removing a repeated letter (e.g., BALNCE) were no harder to reject than nonwords formed by removing a non-repeated letter (e.g., MIRCLE, BALACE). Significant transposition priming effects were found for 7-letter words (e.g., sevrice-SERVICE), and these priming effects did not vary as a function of the position of the transposition (initial, final, or inner letter pair). Priming effects disappeared when primes were formed by replacing the two transposed letters with different letters (e.g., sedlice-SERVICE), and five-letter words only showed priming effects with inner letter transpositions (e.g., ponit-POINT). We present a revised “open-bigram” scheme for letter position coding that accounts for these data.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01690960344000198

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 1 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 221

Metadata

Authors
Schoonbaert, S., & Grainger, J.
Affiliations
  • a Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
  • b CNRS and University of Provence, Aix-en-Provence, France
Venue
Language and Cognitive Processes
Published
2004-06
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
333-367
ISSN
  • 0169-0965
  • 1464-0732
Cited by
221
References
1
Language
en

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