CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 134Reading and Literacy DevelopmentNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismPhonetics and Phonology Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Lexical Priming and Sound-to-Spelling Contingency Effects in Nonword Spelling

Barry, Christopher, Seymour, Philip H. K.·1988·The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A
DOI 10.1080/14640748808402280
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Campbell (1983) demonstrated that nonword spelling may be influenced by the spelling patterns of previously heard, rhyming words (“lexical priming”). We report an experiment that compares two nonword spelling tasks: an experimental (“priming”) task, in which nonwords were preceded by rhyming words of different spellings (as in Campbell's task), and a free-spelling task in which only nonwords are presented. The frequency of production of critical spelling patterns was significantly greater in the experimental task than in the free-spelling task (a lexical priming effect). However, there were, and equally for both tasks, significant and substantial effects of sound-to-spelling contingency (i.e. the frequency with which spelling patterns represent vowel phonemes in words): subjects produced more high-contingency (i.e. common) spelling patterns of vowels than low-contingency (rare) spellings. Further, within high-contingency spelling patterns, subjects more frequently produced the most common spelling correspondence of vowels than the second most common spelling. The results are interpreted within a proposed model of assembled spelling, in which it is suggested that there exist a set of probabilistic sound-to-spelling mappings that relate vowel phonemes to weighted lists of alternative spelling patterns ordered by sound-to-spelling contingency, but that the selection of a spelling pattern from such lists is open to lexical influence.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14640748808402280

Cites

22 of 22 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

Show all 22 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Hatfield F. M., 1983, Aphasia therapy.
  2. Hatfield F. M., 1984, Advances in neurology, Vol. 42: Progress in aphasiology.
  3. Marcel A. J., 1980, Deep dyslexia.
  4. Newcombe F., 1980, Deep dyslexia.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Barry, C., & Seymour, P. H. K.
Affiliations
University of Dundee (GB)
ORCID
Venue
The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1988-02
Volume
40
Issue
1
Pages
5-40
ISSN
  • 0272-4987 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0740
DOI
10.1080/14640748808402280
OpenAlex
W2025308749
Cited by
134
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 2
FWCI
4.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
Keywords
nonword spelling, lexical priming, vowel spelling, spelling patterns, rhyming words

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