The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Morphological decomposition based on the analysis of orthography
Abstract
Recent theories of morphological processing have been dominated by the notion that morphologically complex words are decomposed into their constituents on the basis of their semantic properties. In this article we argue that the weight of evidence now suggests that the recognition of morphologically complex words begins with a rapid morphemic segmentation based solely on the analysis of orthography. Following a review of this evidence, we discuss the characteristics of this form of decomposition, speculate on what its purpose might be, consider how it might be learned in the developing reader, and describe what is known of its neural bases. Our discussion ends by reflecting on how evidence for semantically based decomposition might be (re)interpreted in the context of the orthographically based form of decomposition that we have described.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Both these prime types show priming that is similar to that of semantically transparent complex primes (worker–work; see Rastle and Davis, 2008 for review)”
From A Dual-Route Approach to Orthographic Processing (2011) · cites this paper as Rastle and Davis, 2008
In the citing paper
“On the basis of these results, it is commonly agreed that morphology influences visual word recognition through fast and automatic morpho-orthographic segmentation (see Rastle and Davis, 2008, for a review of the findings).”
From A Dual-Route Approach to Orthographic Processing (2011) · cites this paper as Rastle and Davis, 2008
In the citing paper
“and significantly larger facilitation than primes consisting of the stem plus a non-suffix ending (scandal–scan).”
From A Dual-Route Approach to Orthographic Processing (2011) · cites this paper as Rastle and Davis, 2008
Citations
Cites
Neurophysiological investigation of the basis of the fMRI signal
Logothetis, N. K., Pauls, J., Augath, M., Trinath, T., & Oeltermann, A. (2001) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35084005 · Cited by 6,551
Word Segmentation: The Role of Distributional Cues
Saffran, J. R., Newport, E. L., & Aslin, R. N. (1996) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1006/jmla.1996.0032 · Cited by 1,405 · cited 2×
“Further, both adults and 8-month-old infants use these sequential probabilities in segmenting words from connected speech sequences in artificial language studies (Saffran, Newport, & Aslin, 1996a ; Saffran, Aslin, & Newport, 1996b ).”
BackgroundOrthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model.
Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.103.3.518 · Cited by 947
Distributional regularity and phonotactic constraints are useful for segmentation
Brent, M. R., & Cartwright, T. A. (1996) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(96)00719-6 · Cited by 514 · cited 4×
“A similar statistical approach has been proposed by Brent and colleagues in word and morpheme discovery (Brent, 1993; Brent & Cartwright, 1996), though these implementations require a perhaps implausibly large memory for unanalysed sequences.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialLetter Binding and Invariant Recognition of Masked Words: Behavioral and Neuroimaging Evidence
Dehaene, S., Jobert, A., Naccache, L., Ciuciu, P., Poline, J.-B., Le Bihan, D., & Cohen, L. (2004) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00674.x · Cited by 356
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 92
- 10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00119-6 · DOI
- 10.1080/01690960444000106 · DOI
- 10.1162/jocn.2007.19.9.1464 · DOI
- Brent , M. R. 1993 . Minimal generative explanations: A middle ground between neurons and triggers . Paper presented at the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society .
- 10.1023/A:1025032825951 · DOI
- 10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01350-9 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1162/jocn.1993.5.1.34 · DOI
- 10.1080/09540099550039309 · DOI
- 10.1006/brln.1997.1818 · DOI
- 10.1006/cogp.1997.0649 · DOI
- 10.1006/brln.2001.2549 · DOI
- 10.1080/016909698386528 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0033-295X.108.1.204 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0096-3445.128.2.165 · DOI
- Davis , C. J. 1999 . The Self-Organising Lexical Acquisition and Recognition (SOLAR) model of visual word recognition Unpublished doctoral dissertation .
- Davis M. H., 2003, Connectionist models of development: Developmental processes in real and artificial neural networks
- 10.1073/pnas.0405788101 · DOI
- Davis M. H., 1997, Proceedings of the Fourth Neural Computation and Psychology Workshop: Connectionist Representations
- 10.1037/0096-1523.28.1.218 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00471-1 · DOI
- Davis M. H., 2003, Morphological structure in language processing, 427, 10.1515/9783110910186.427 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tics.2005.05.004 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.0403766101 · DOI
- 10.1080/01690960444000197 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0096-1523.21.5.1098 · DOI
- 10.1207/s15516709cog1402_1 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1006/brln.1999.2077 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00416-4 · DOI
- Ford M., 2003, Morphological structure in language processing, 89, 10.1515/9783110910186.89 · DOI
- 10.1080/01690960050119698 · DOI
- 10.1348/000712607X181304 · DOI
- 10.1037/0278-7393.23.4.829 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03211828 · DOI
- 10.1080/01690960050119652 · DOI
- 10.1162/jocn.2007.19.12.1983 · DOI
- 10.1037/0096-3445.136.2.323 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01885.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.tics.2005.11.006 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2005.01.003 · DOI
- Hubel D. N., 2005, Brain and visual perception: The story of a 25-year collaboration
- 10.2307/416276 · DOI
- Johnsrude I., 2005, Cognitive psychology: A methods companion
- Jusczyk P. W., 1997, The discovery of spoken language
- 10.1080/01690960701799635 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0926-6410(01)00085-4 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0304-3940(99)00527-3 · DOI
- 10.1162/jocn.2007.19.5.866 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jml.2005.02.008 · DOI
- 10.1080/01690960244000036 · DOI
- 10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01870-3 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/01690960701588004 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-295X.101.1.3 · DOI
- 10.1080/016909699386257 · DOI
- 10.1037/0096-3445.134.4.477 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-295X.88.5.375 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jml.2007.05.006 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jml.2006.11.005 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00538.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.bandl.2003.12.002 · DOI
- 10.1142/9789812702784_0025 · DOI
- 10.1093/cercor/11.10.966 · DOI
- 10.1109/IJCNN.1990.137732 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0926-6410(97)00012-8 · DOI
- 10.1006/jmla.1998.2576 · DOI
- 10.1080/01690960050119661 · DOI
- 10.1017/S0140525X00473358 · DOI
- Plunkett K., 1997, Exercises in Rethinking Innateness: A Handbook for Connectionist Simulations, 10.7551/mitpress/2906.001.0001 · DOI
- 10.1080/01690960444000098 · DOI
- 10.1016/0749-596X(92)90004-H · DOI
- Rastle K., 2003, Masked priming: State of the art, 279
- 10.1080/01690960050119689 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03196742 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0959-4388(02)00304-5 · DOI
- Rueckl J., 2008, Language and Cognitive Processes, 00, 000
- 10.1006/brln.1999.2106 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-295X.89.1.60 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.274.5294.1926 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/01690960344000198 · DOI · Paper page
- Schreuder R., 1995, Morphological aspects of language processing, 131
- 10.1006/jmla.1997.2510 · DOI
- Seidenberg M. S., 1987, Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading, 245
- 10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.523 · DOI · Paper page
- Sejnowski T. J., 1987, Complex Systems, 1, 145
- 10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90219-6 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90439-4 · DOI
- 10.1080/01690969408402120 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0022-5371(75)80051-X · DOI
- 10.1126/science.8235589 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.03.008 · DOI
- Wolff J. G., 1977, British Journal of Psychology, 68, 97, 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1977.tb01563.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01915.x · DOI
- Zweig , E. & Pylkkänen , L. (in press) . A visual M170 effect of morphological complexity . Language and Cognitive Processes E-pub ahead of print, DOI: 10.1080/01690960802180420 . · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ending the reading wars: Reading acquisition from novice to expert
Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100618772271 · Cited by 1,297
Self-citationA Dual-Route Approach to Orthographic Processing
Grainger, J., & Ziegler, J. C. (2011) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00054 · Cited by 459
Temporal predictive codes for spoken words in auditory cortex
Gagnepain, P., Henson, R. N., & Davis, M. H. (2012) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.015 · Cited by 235
Self-citationHebrew Brain vs. English Brain: Language Modulates the Way It Is Processed
Bick, A. S., Goelman, G., & Frost, R. (2011) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn.2010.21583 · Cited by 71
“Our results showing a morphological effect that is not influenced by semantics strengthen Goldʼs conclusions that this region is involved in the structural level of morphological processing that is mainly morpho-orthographic (see Rastle & Davis, 2008 for a detailed review).”
Influential
Metadata
- Authors
- Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H.
- Venue
- Language and Cognitive Processes
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2008-11
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 7-8
- Pages
- 942-971
- ISSN
- 0169-0965
- 1464-0732
- Cited by
- 384
- References
- 5
- 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
