Evidence for Early Morphological Decomposition in Visual Word Recognition
Abstract
We employ a single-trial correlational MEG analysis technique to investigate early processing in the visual recognition of morphologically complex words. Three classes of affixed words were presented in a lexical decision task: free stems (e.g., taxable), bound roots (e.g., tolerable), and unique root words (e.g., vulnerable, the root of which does not appear elsewhere). Analysis was focused on brain responses within 100–200 msec poststimulus onset in the previously identified letter string and visual word-form areas. MEG data were analyzed using cortically constrained minimum-norm estimation. Correlations were computed between activity at functionally defined ROIs and continuous measures of the words' morphological properties. ROIs were identified across subjects on a reference brain and then morphed back onto each individual subject's brain (n = 9). We find evidence of decomposition for both free stems and bound roots at the M170 stage in processing. The M170 response is shown to be sensitive to morphological properties such as affix frequency and the conditional probability of encountering each word given its stem. These morphological properties are contrasted with orthographic form features (letter string frequency, transition probability from one string to the next), which exert effects on earlier stages in processing (∼130 msec). We find that effects of decomposition at the M170 can, in fact, be attributed to morphological properties of complex words, rather than to purely orthographic and form-related properties. Our data support a model of word recognition in which decomposition is attempted, and possibly utilized, for complex words containing bound roots as well as free word-stems.
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?
Sublexical morpho-orthographic processing is performed by neural structures in fusiform gyrus.
“With respect to the role of fusiform gyrus in fine-grained orthographic processing as defined in our account, it is important to note that there is evidence suggesting that sublexical morpho-orthographic processing is performed by neural structures in this region (Bick et al., 2011; Solomyak and Marantz, 2009).”
From A Dual-Route Approach to Orthographic Processing (2011) · cites this paper as Solomyak and Marantz, 2009
Cites
Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG- and MEG-data
Maris, E., & Oostenveld, R. (2007) · Journal of Neuroscience Methods · doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.03.024 · Cited by 8,496 · see citing works
The visual word form area: expertise for reading in the fusiform gyrus
McCandliss, B. D., Cohen, L., & Dehaene, S. (2003) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(03)00134-7 · Cited by 1,489 · see citing works
The visual word form area: a prelexical representation of visual words in the fusiform gyrus
Dehaene, S., Le Clec’H, G., Poline, J.-B., Le Bihan, D., & Cohen, L. (2002) · Neuroreport · doi:10.1097/00001756-200203040-00015 · Cited by 727 · 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
Syntactic structure building in the anterior temporal lobe during natural story listening
Brennan, J., Nir, Y., Hasson, U., Malach, R., Heeger, D. J., & Pylkkänen, L. (2012) · Brain and Language · doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2010.04.002 · Cited by 279 · see citing works
The core and beyond in the language-ready brain
Hagoort, P. (2017) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.01.048 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
- Authors
- Solomyak, O., & Marantz, A.
- Affiliations
- New York University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 2010-09-01
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 2042-2057
- ISSN
- 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
- 1530-8898
- OpenAlex
- W2118438280
- Cited by
- 148
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 10.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Keywords
- visual word recognition, morphological decomposition, morphologically complex words, M170, orthographic processing, lexical decision
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Humans, Photic Stimulation, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Reading, Time Factors, Word Association Tests, Recognition, Psychology, Young Adult
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