Cited by 459Reading and Literacy DevelopmentSecond Language Acquisition and LearningNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism

A Dual-Route Approach to Orthographic Processing

Open access
Grainger, Jonathan, Ziegler, Johannes C.·2011·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

In the present theoretical note we examine how different learning constraints, thought to be involved in optimizing the mapping of print to meaning during reading acquisition, might shape the nature of the orthographic code involved in skilled reading.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00054

Cites

121 of 121 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

10 of 107 cited sources checked · 7 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation

    The differential time-course of orthographic and phonological effects has been revealed in masked priming studies.

    “This differential time-course of effects has been revealed on several occasions in studies of masked orthographic and phonological priming (Ferrand and Grainger, 1994; Ziegler et al., 2000).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Ferrand and Grainger, 1994 source
    • cites Ziegler et al., 2000 source
  • Interpretationcitation

    Development of parallel orthographic processing reduces phonological effects that arise principally via phonological recoding.

    “(2) a reduction in phonological effects that arise principally via phonological recoding (e.g., Sprenger-Charolles et al., 2003)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sprenger-Charolles et al., 2003 source

      The Development of Reading and Spelling Skills section reports that the expected fading of the regularity effect—a measure of reliance on phonological processing—appeared in reading latencies only, from the end of Grade 3. It did not appear in spelling, and phonological effects persisted in other measures. The unqualified claim of a reduction is therefore broader than the paper's findings. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation

    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).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Bick et al., 2011 source

      The Discussion (page unavailable) says the left occipito-temporal region is involved in a structural level of morphological processing that is mainly morpho-orthographic. It does not identify the region showing that effect specifically as the fusiform gyrus, so the claim’s precise anatomical location is not established by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.83)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Solomyak and Marantz, 2009 source
  • Findingown data

    Intact derived primes produced significant priming.

    “we found significant priming from intact derived primes (e.g., farmer–farm) and TL derived primes (e.g., faremr–farm), as well significant priming from intact pseudo-derived primes (e.g., corner–corn), but most important, no priming from TL pseudo-derivations (e.g., corenr–corn).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Intact pseudo-derived primes produced significant priming.

    “we found significant priming from intact derived primes (e.g., farmer–farm) and TL derived primes (e.g., faremr–farm), as well significant priming from intact pseudo-derived primes (e.g., corner–corn), but most important, no priming from TL pseudo-derivations (e.g., corenr–corn).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 35
  • May combine two claims. 28
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 2
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Open-bigram coding represents ordered pairs of letters independently of their contiguity.

    “In Grainger and van Heuven's scheme, open-bigrams code for the presence of ordered pairs of letters independently of their contiguity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Mozer (1987)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Whitney (2001) source

      Section 2.4, “Bigram and Word Levels,” says bigram nodes recognize ordered pairs of letters and can be activated by noncontiguous letters. That supports the description of open-bigram coding, but the passage describes Whitney’s SERIOL framework, not Grainger and van Heuven’s scheme; our copy does not establish that attribution. (LLM, conf=0.83)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Grainger and van Heuven (2003)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Open-bigram coding is only one possible implementation; replacing it with another scheme would not harm the approach if the new mechanism is flexible and maximizes diagnostic information under visibility constraints.

    “Replacing this mechanism with an alternative coding scheme (e.g., Gomez et al., 2008) would not be detrimental to our approach, as long as the new mechanism exhibits the key properties of flexibility, and maximizing the use of diagnostic information given constraints in letter visibility.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gomez et al., 2008 source
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Pseudo-homophones are harder to reject as non-words in lexical decision, generate more semantic categorization errors, and are more effective primes than matched orthographic controls.

    “These stimuli are harder to reject as non-words in a lexical decision task (e.g., Goswami et al., 2001; Ziegler et al., 2001), generate more semantic categorization errors (e.g., Van Orden, 1987), and are more effective primes compared with carefully matched orthographic controls”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Goswami et al., 2001

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Ziegler et al., 2001

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Van Orden, 1987 source
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    The dual-route architecture may emerge because visual word recognition mixes a spatial world of visual objects and a temporal world of spoken language.

    “As suggested by Grainger and Holcomb (2009), it is possible that this dual-route architecture emerges from the fact that visual word recognition is a mixture of two worlds: one whose main dimension is space – the world of visual objects; and the other whose main dimension is time – the world of spoken language.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Grainger and Holcomb (2009) source
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Orthographic processing proceeds in a posterior-anterior sweep through left fusiform gyrus, with increased location-invariance and increased sensitivity to orthographic structure.

    “The evidence at present suggests that orthographic processing proceeds in a posterior–anterior sweep through left fusiform gyrus, with an increase in location-invariance (Dehaene et al., 2004) accompanied by increased sensitivity to orthographic structure (Vinckier et al., 2007).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Dehaene et al., 2004

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Vinckier et al., 2007 source
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Morpho-semantic representations are supralexical and impose a morphological organization on whole-word form representations.

    “As shown in Figure 5, morpho-semantic representations are supralexical representations that impose a morphological organization on whole-word form representations (Grainger et al., 1991; Giraudo and Grainger, 2001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Grainger et al., 1991

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Giraudo and Grainger, 2001 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    In the non-lexical route, sublexical orthographic information is first converted into a sublexical phonological code before contacting phonological output units, whole-word phonological representations, and semantics.

    “Along the so-called indirect, non-lexical route, sublexical orthographic information is first transformed into a sublexical phonological code before making contact with phonological output units, whole-word phonological representations, and semantics.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The diagnosticity and chunking constraints produce two distinct kinds of prelexical orthographic code, coarse-grained and fine-grained, which correspond to the two routes of a dual-route architecture.

    “These two constraints give rise to two different kinds of prelexical orthographic code, a coarse-grained and a fine-grained code, associated with the two routes of a dual-route architecture.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisereasoning

    In dual-route models of reading, this single sublexical orthographic code feeds both whole-word orthographic representations and sublexical phonological representations.

    “In dual-route models of reading, this unique sublexical orthographic code feeds activation forward to both whole-word orthographic representations (direct route) and sublexical phonological representations (indirect route).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Identifying a unique orthographic word requires knowing where a letter is within the word, not where it is on the retina.

    “However, identifying a unique orthographic word requires knowledge about where a given letter is in the word, not on the retina.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    During reading acquisition, optimizing the mapping from print to meaning involves selecting letter combinations that are most informative about word identity (the diagnosticity constraint).

    “On the one hand, optimization is hypothesized to involve selecting combinations of letters that are the most informative with respect to word identity (diagnosticity constraint)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    These two orthographic codes are hypothesized to have developed because of the constraints that shape orthographic representations during reading acquisition.

    “These two types of orthographic codes are hypothesized to have developed as a result of the nature of the constraints that fashion the formation of orthographic representations during reading acquisition”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Grainger and Dufau, 2011

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The traditional dual-route model of reading aloud distinguishes a lexical route and a non-lexical route for transforming print to sound.

    “The starting point of the present endeavor is the traditional dual-route model of reading aloud, that distinguishes between a lexical route and a non-lexical route for transforming print to sound”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Ellis and Young, 1988

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Coltheart et al., 1993, 2001

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Zorzi, 2010 source
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisereasoning

    The hard problem of orthographic processing is transforming location-specific retinotopic visual information into a location-invariant word-centered orthographic code.

    “These models therefore avoid the hard problem of orthographic processing, that is, the transformation of location-specific retinotopic visual information into a location-invariant word-centered orthographic code.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The fine-grained route is sensitive to the exact order of letters and to their position relative to word beginnings and endings.

    “Processing along the fined-grained route, on the other hand, is sensitive to the precise ordering of letters, as well as to position with respect to word beginnings and endings.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The coarse-grained route supports fast access to semantics by using minimal letter subsets that maximize word-identity information, and it codes approximate within-word letter position without requiring letter contiguity.

    “Processing along the coarse-grained route optimizes fast access to semantics by using minimal subsets of letters that maximize information with respect to word identity, while coding for approximate within-word letter position independently of letter contiguity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The BIAM is a localist implementation of the triangle approach to visual word recognition, with direct and indirect (via phonology) routes from orthography to semantics.

    “The BIAM can be seen as a localist implementation of the generic division of labor or “triangle” approach to visual word recognition, in which there are two routes from orthography to semantics – a direct route and an indirect route via phonology”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Seidenberg and McClelland, 1989 source
    • cites Plaut et al., 1996 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    In the lexical route, sublexical orthographic information contacts whole-word orthographic representations, which then provide access to whole-word phonology and higher-level semantics.

    “The lexical route is often referred to as the direct route, whereby sublexical orthographic information makes direct contact with whole-word orthographic representations, which then provide access to whole-word phonology on the one hand, and higher-level semantic information on the other.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The multiple-route model in Figure 4 extends the BIAM by incorporating the distinction between two types of sublexical orthographic code.

    “Figure 4 describes a multiple-route model of printed word recognition that is basically an extension of the BIAM that incorporates the distinction drawn between two types of sublexical orthographic code.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This allows orthographic information to contact pre-existing sublexical phonological and morphological representations.

    “This allows orthographic information to make contact with pre-existing sublexical phonological and morphological representations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Like the BIAM, the multiple-route model resembles dual-route models of reading aloud and especially the CDP+ model.

    “Like the BIAM, our multiple-route model of word recognition has many similarities with dual-route models of reading aloud (Coltheart et al., 2001) and particularly the CDP+ model (Perry et al., 2007, 2010).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Coltheart et al., 2001 source
    • cites Perry et al., 2007, 2010

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Acha and Perea found standard transposed-letter priming for transposed-letter word primes but no priming for transposed-letter pseudo-homophone primes, as predicted.

    “They found the standard TL priming effect for TL word primes, but no priming effect for TL pseudo-homophone primes, as predicted by our dual-route approach.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Acha and Perea (2010)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    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).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Frankish and Turner, 2007

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Frankish and Barnes, 2008 source
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Phonological influences on visual word recognition are fast acting but require more processing than purely orthographic effects.

    “Furthermore, in line with the architecture of the BIAM and its extension in the form of the multiple-route model shown in Figure 4, we know that phonological influences on visual word recognition are fast acting (Braun et al., 2009), but nevertheless require more processing than that required to obtain purely orthographic effects.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Braun et al., 2009

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    A dual-route approach follows naturally from this distinction because learning the two types of code likely involves fundamentally different mechanisms.

    “A dual-route approach follows naturally from this distinction to the extent that fundamentally different mechanisms are likely to be involved in learning these two types of code.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Transposing two letters of 'storm' can generate either a regular non-word such as 'strom' or an irregular non-word such as 'sotrm'.

    “Transposing two letters of the baseword “storm,” for example, can generate either an orthostatically and phonotactically regular non-word such as “strom” or an orthostatically and phonotactically irregular non-word such as “sotrm.””
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Purely orthographic constraints need to be supplemented with phonological constraints to optimize sublexical print-to-sound conversion.

    “Here we imply that purely orthographic constraints need to be supplemented with phonological constraints in order to optimize the sublexical conversion of print-to-sound.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The fine-grained orthographic processing route is not limited to processing grapheme representations.

    “However, in the present theoretical approach, the fine-grained orthographic processing route is not limited to the case of processing grapheme representations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Slot-coding with both beginning and end anchor points, as proposed by Jacobs et al., is one solution for fine-grained letter position coding.

    “One solution would be to adopt slot-coding with both beginning and end anchor points, such as proposed by Jacobs et al. (1998), a variant of which has been adopted in recent work on letter position coding in written language production”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Jacobs et al. (1998)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Under the hypothesis that phonemes are good candidates for sublexical phonological representations, single-letter representations are required to contact phonemes written with a single letter.

    “Furthermore, under the hypothesis that phonemes are a good candidate for such sublexical phonological representations, single-letter representations are required in order to make contact with the numerous phonemes that are written with a single letter.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Phonemes are a good candidate for sublexical phonological representations.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Open-bigram coding naturally explains flexible orthographic processing and, with letter visibility and informativity, accounts for variations in orthographic priming by overlap position and letter type.

    “Not only does open-bigram coding provide a natural explanation for these empirical demonstrations of flexible orthographic processing, but when combined with the constraints of letter visibility and informativity it can also account for more subtle variations in orthographic priming effects as a function of the position of orthographic overlap and the precise letters involved”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Grainger, 2008

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Fischer-Baum et al. showed that this coding scheme provided a superior account of spelling errors in two dysgraphic persons compared with alternative letter position coding schemes.

    “Fischer-Baum et al. (2010) showed that this type of coding scheme provided a superior account of the patterns of spelling errors in two dysgraphic persons, compared with alternative letter position coding schemes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Fischer-Baum et al. (2010) source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Two types of constraints affect processing along the two routes, and both are driven by the frequency with which letter combinations occur in printed words.

    “The dual-route approach acknowledges that two different types of constraints affect processing along the two routes. Both types of constraints are driven by the frequency with which different combinations of letters occur in printed words.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationnone given

    The dual-route approach can be integrated within the BIAM framework.

    “Our dual-route approach to orthographic processing can be easily integrated within the more general framework of a BIAM of visual word recognition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    These constraints push the system to develop diagnostic letter combinations for word identity and clusters of highly co-occurring letters of functional significance.

    “It is hypothesized that these constraints push the system to develop diagnostic features (letter combinations) for word identity on the one hand, and clusters of highly co-occurring letters of functional significance, on the other.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The model explicitly describes print-to-meaning processing via orthographic representations alone and distinguishes location-specific from location-invariant codes.

    “The model proposed in Figure 4 provides a more explicit description of the processing involved in getting from print to meaning via orthographic representations alone, and draws a key distinction between location-specific and location-invariant (word-centered) orthographic codes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The two routes use frequency of occurrence in opposite ways and perform fundamentally different types of orthographic processing.

    “Fundamentally different types of orthographic processing are performed by the two routes of our dual-route approach, since they are geared to use frequency of occurrence in diametrically opposite ways.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Skilled readers might capitalize on this by using spatial structure to map orthography to semantics and temporal structure to map orthography to phonology.

    “Skilled readers might therefore have learned to capitalize on this particularity, using structure in space in order to optimize the mapping of an orthographic form onto semantics, and using structure in time in order to optimize the mapping of an orthographic form onto phonology.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This fast guess is not foolproof but provides rapid bottom-up activation of whole-word representations that can combine with contextual constraints.

    “This is not intended to be a foolproof means of knowing what word is present, but a means to provide rapid bottom-up activation of whole-word representations that can be combined with contextual constraints in order to home-in on the correct word meaning during reading comprehension.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    The same mechanism is responsible for extracting other highly recurring contiguous letter combinations, such as affixes.

    “It is also thought to be the mechanism responsible for extracting other types of highly recurring contiguous letter combinations, such as affixes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Morphological priming is larger than both form priming and semantic priming.

    “Critically, morphological priming is larger than both form priming (scandal–scan) and semantic priming (giraffe–horse; see Diependaele et al., 2011 for review).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Diependaele et al., 2011

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    The best way to optimize performance is to adapt processing to constraints imposed by variations in letter visibility and in the amount of information carried by different letter combinations.

    “Given variations in visibility across letters in a string, the key hypothesis here is that the best way to optimize performance is to adapt processing to the constraints imposed by variations in letter visibility and variations in the amount of information carried by different letter combinations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Graphemes activate corresponding phonemes, which then activate the appropriate whole-word phonological representation and semantic representations.

    “These graphemes then activate the corresponding phonemes, which in turn lead to activation of the appropriate whole-word phonological representation and the corresponding semantic representations”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Perry et al., 2007 source
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Premisecitation

    Reading morphologically complex words involves sublexical segmentation into constituent morphemes.

    “There is growing evidence that part of the process of reading morphologically complex words involves the sublexical segmentation of the word into its constituent morphemes (e.g., work + er).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: A large proportion of words encountered in daily reading are morphologically complex, about 75% in French and 85% in English.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Optimization of identification processes generally involves extracting diagnostic information and simplifying processing via data compression.

    “Therefore, a more general answer to the above question would be that optimization of identification processes (for any kind of object) involves extraction of diagnostic information on the one hand, and a simplification of processing via data compression on the other”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Fischer-Baum et al. proposed 'both ends' letter position coding, in which each letter is represented twice, relative to word beginning and relative to word end.

    “Fischer-Baum et al. (2010) propose that letter position is coded both from the beginning to the end, and from the end to the beginning of the string (a scheme referred to as “both ends” letter position coding).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Fischer-Baum et al. (2010) source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Phonological constraints could operate at the level of individual phonemes and phonological syllables, as in CDP++.

    “These phonological constraints could operate at the level of individual phonemes and phonological syllables, as in CDP++ (Perry et al., 2010).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Perry et al., 2010 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The fine-grained route is dedicated to precisely specifying within-string positions of letter identities to facilitate chunking of frequently co-occurring contiguous letter combinations, such as complex graphemes and small morphemes.

    “Here, we hypothesize that this route is more generally dedicated to precisely specifying the within-string positions of letter identities in order to facilitate the chunking of frequently co-occurring contiguous4 letter combinations, such as complex graphemes (e.g., TH, CH, OO) and small morphemes (i.e., affixes such as RE, ED, ER, ING).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Morpho-orthographic segmentation occurs along the fine-grained orthographic processing route of the dual-route model.

    “Here we hypothesize that such morpho-orthographic segmentation occurs along the fine-grained orthographic processing route of our model.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Non-Semitic Hebrew words are processed like English and French words, with robustness to TL manipulations arising from coarse-grained processing.

    “Within our dual-route approach, these non-Semitic Hebrew words would be processed just like English and French words, with robustness to TL manipulations arising from involvement of the coarse-grained processing route.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Two factors could help focus attention on contiguous letter dependencies: initial supervised learning and pre-existing phonological or morphological representations.

    “In the specific case of learning to read words, two factors could help focus attention on contiguous dependencies between letters. One would be an initial phase of supervised learning, whereby the beginning reader is told that a given complex grapheme corresponds to a particular phoneme. The other is the presence of pre-existing phonological and/or morphological representations that correspond to”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Morphological influences reflect both morpho-orthographic and morpho-semantic processing.

    “According to the account of morphological processing proposed by Diependaele et al. (2005, 2009; see also Morris et al., 2011), such morphological influences not only reflect morpho-orthographic processing, but also morpho-semantic processing.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Diependaele et al., 2005 source
    • cites Diependaele et al., 2009 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

    • cites Morris et al., 2011

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    A precise word-centered letter-position coding scheme enables chunking of frequently co-occurring contiguous letter combinations independently of eye fixation location.

    “Here it is hypothesized that a precise word-centered letter-position coding scheme enables the chunking of frequently co-occurring contiguous letter combinations, such as multi-letter graphemes and affixes, independently of eye fixation location in the word.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Because morpho-orthographic segmentation is the only source of priming for pseudo-derived relations, a TL manipulation eliminates priming in that condition.

    “Since this is hypothesized to the only source of priming for pseudo-derived relations (e.g., corner–corn), a TL manipulation eliminates priming in this condition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    Coarse-grained optimization involves developing letter combination detectors that best constrain word identity, the diagnosticity constraint.

    “Here, optimization is thought to involve the development of letter combination detectors that best constrain word identity (the diagnosticity constraint), in the same way that parts of objects act as clues to object identity in certain theoretical approaches to visual object recognition (e.g., Ullman et al., 2002).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ullman et al., 2002 source
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Non-adjacent contingencies are harder to learn than adjacent ones because attention is easier to focus on contiguous events.

    “According to Pacton and Perruchet (2008), the reason why non-adjacent contingencies are typically harder to learn than adjacent contingencies is because it is easier to focus attention on contiguous events than non-contiguous events.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Pacton and Perruchet, 2008 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted).

    Interpretationcitation

    Development of parallel letter identification causes a shift from sequential letter encoding to parallel mapping onto higher-level orthographic representations such as graphemes and affixes, retaining precision.

    “The development of parallel letter identification is therefore hypothesized to cause a shift from a strictly sequential letter encoding (that outputs an ordered set of phonemes) to a more parallel mapping of letters onto higher-level orthographic representations such as graphemes and affixes, that retains the same level of precision as the strictly sequential mechanism (see Alario et al., 2007).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Alario et al., 2007 source
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Letter transpositions selectively interfere with fine-grained orthographic processing and therefore selectively perturb sublexical morpho-orthographic segmentation.

    “According to our dual-route model, letter transpositions selectively interfere with fine-grained orthographic processing, and therefore selectively perturb sublexical morpho-orthographic segmentation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    The two types of orthographic coding in the model emerge from specific constraints operating during reading acquisition.

    “This is an essential extension of the approach, given that the two types of orthographic coding postulated in our model are thought to emerge as the result of specific constraints operating during reading acquisition.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The nature of the two sublexical location-invariant orthographic codes is determined by constraints from the general goal of optimizing the mapping of letters onto meaning during reading acquisition.
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationnone given

    The dual-route approach posits two fundamentally different types of sublexical, word-centered orthographic representations.

    “We have described a dual-route approach to orthographic processing that posits the existence of two fundamentally different types of sublexical, word-centered, orthographic representations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
60 of 60
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Pseudo-homophone priming effects are subtended by sublexical phonology.

    “under the assumption that pseudo-homophone priming effects are subtended by sublexical phonology (see Rastle and Brysbaert, 2006, for review)”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    During reading, the eyes fixate most words, usually once, and information uptake from a fixated word depends on fixation position.

    “During reading, the eyes fixate the majority of words in the text, mostly just once, and information uptake from the fixated word is a function of fixation position in the word.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Phonemes are a good candidate for sublexical phonological representations.

    “under the hypothesis that phonemes are a good candidate for such sublexical phonological representations”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A large proportion of words encountered in daily reading are morphologically complex, about 75% in French and 85% in English.

    “A large number of the words we read every day are morphologically complex (approximately 75% in French and 85% in English).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The two processing routes are not subject to any on-line control mechanism that could disable one or the other route.

    “given that we do not expect the two processing routes to be subject to any kind of on-line control mechanism that could disable one or the other processing route.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The beginning reader initially uses a serial letter-by-letter reading strategy because parallel letter identification is not yet established.

    “Initially, this will involve a serial letter-by-letter reading strategy, since the mechanism for parallel letter identification is not yet established.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The nature of the two sublexical location-invariant orthographic codes is determined by constraints from the general goal of optimizing the mapping of letters onto meaning during reading acquisition.

    “The nature of the two types of sublexical location-invariant orthographic codes that are hypothesized in our approach, is thought to be determined by the constraints imposed by the general goal of optimizing the mapping of letters onto meaning while learning to read.”
7 of 7

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

22 of the 143 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grainger, J., & Ziegler, J. C.
Affiliations
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2011
Volume
2
Pages
54-54
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2069201295
Cited by
459
References
143
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 26
FWCI
51.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Keywords
orthographic processing, dual-route model, reading acquisition, orthographic code, skilled reading, sublexical processing, morphological processing, graphemes, letter position, prefixes and suffixes

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-09-28.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-09-28.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

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