Short Article: Lexical and Sublexical Processes in the Perception of Transposed-Letter Anagrams
Abstract
Evidence from priming and lexical decision tasks suggests that nonwords created by transposing adjacent letter pairs (TL nonwords) are very effective in activating lexical representations of their base words, because the process of orthographic matching tolerates minor changes in letter position. However, this account disregards the possible role of sublexical processing in reading. TL nonwords are perceptually ambiguous, with lexical and sublexical processing giving rise to conflicting interpretations. The consequences of this ambiguity were investigated in a lexical decision experiment with primes that were either high or low bigram frequency TL versions of target words. Priming effects were much larger for low BF primes (e.g., pucnh–PUNCH) than for high BF primes (e.g., panit– PAINT). This finding is interpreted as evidence that lexical activation can be inhibited by competing output resulting from sublexical processing of TL letter string. We conclude that phonological processing is an important determinant of responses to TL stimuli, and we consider how this interpretation might be accommodated within the dual-route cascaded (DRC) model of word recognition.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Frankish and colleagues found that illegal non-words were more readily misperceived as the baseword, took longer to reject in lexical decision, and were more effective primes.
“Frankish and colleagues found that the illegal non-words were more readily misperceived as the corresponding baseword in a perceptual identification task, took longer to reject as a non-word in the lexical decision task (Frankish and Turner, 2007), and were more effective primes for the corresponding baseword targets in a masked priming experiment (Frankish and Barnes, 2008).”
From A Dual-Route Approach to Orthographic Processing (2011) · cites this paper as Frankish and Barnes, 2008
Cites
The effect of orthographic similarity on lexical retrieval: Resolving neighborhood conflicts
Andrews, S. (1997) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03214334 · Cited by 535 · see citing works
Serial processing in reading aloud: Evidence for dual-route models of reading.
Coltheart, M., & Rastle, K. (1994) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.20.6.1197 · Cited by 391 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Dual-Route Approach to Orthographic Processing
Grainger, J., & Ziegler, J. C. (2011) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00054 · Cited by 459 · see citing works
- Authors
- Frankish, C., & Barnes, L.
- Affiliations
- University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- Venue
- Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-03
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 381-391
- ISSN
- 1747-0218
- 1747-0226
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 2
- 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