A Dual-Route Approach to Orthographic Processing

In the paper

“In Grainger and van Heuven's scheme, open-bigrams code for the presence of ordered pairs of letters independently of their contiguity.”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

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

  cites Mozer (1987)
• Partly supported

  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)

  cites Whitney (2001) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
• ?Not matched

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

  cites Grainger and van Heuven (2003)

In the paper

“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”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Seidenberg and McClelland, 1989 source
• Supported

  The General Framework (p. 6) describes interactions among orthography, phonology, and semantics, and Phonological and Semantic Division of Labor (p. 47) discusses orthography-to-semantics, orthography-to-phonology, and semantics–phonology mappings. Together these support the triangle architecture cited here. Calling the BIAM a localist implementation is the citing authors’ interpretation, not a claim that this paper describes the BIAM. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  cites Plaut et al., 1996 source

In the paper

“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.”

What the sources say

• Supported

  The General Discussion states that the authors analyzed spelling errors from two dysgraphic participants, CM and LSS, and that the graded both-edges scheme clearly outperformed alternative letter-position schemes for both. This directly supports the attributed comparison. (LLM, conf=0.94)

  cites Fischer-Baum et al. (2010) source

In the paper

“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.”

What the sources say

• Supported

  The citation identifies an example of an alternative letter-position coding scheme, not the source of the citing authors’ prediction about replacing their mechanism. In “Implications for Modeling Word Recognition,” the paper explicitly distinguishes its overlap model from the open-bigram model and describes their different coding mechanisms. (LLM, conf=0.93)

  cites Gomez et al., 2008 source

In the paper

“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”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Goswami et al., 2001 source
• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ziegler et al., 2001 source
• Supported

  The citation is attached to the semantic-categorization clause, not the lexical-decision or priming clauses. The General Discussion (page unavailable) reports false-positive categorization errors for nonword homophone foils such as SHEAP; it also reports that their error rates were virtually identical to those for word-homophone foils. The Results (page unavailable) show that homophone foils produced more such errors than controls. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  cites Van Orden, 1987 source

In the paper

“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.”

What the sources say

• Supported

  In “Component Processes in Visual Word Recognition,” the authors explicitly call the contrast between the spatial world of visual objects and the temporal world of spoken language a key motivation for their dual-route approach. The citing sentence preserves the paper’s tentative explanation. (LLM, conf=0.95)

  cites Grainger and Holcomb (2009) source

In the paper

“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).”

What the sources say

• Supported

  The ‘Both-Edges’ section describes each letter as represented relative to both word edges, and ‘Analysis 1c’ states that the scheme assigns both left- and right-edge positions to each letter. The General Discussion says the authors’ results support both-edges position coding. The paper credits earlier models with positing the scheme, but the citing sentence does not claim Fischer-Baum et al. originated it. (LLM, conf=0.91)

  cites Fischer-Baum et al. (2010) source

In the paper

“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.”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Diependaele et al., 2005 source
• Supported

  The Conclusions state that the experiments support morpho-orthographic decomposition and that semantic-transparency effects suggest an additional influence through morpho-semantic representations. The figure description likewise says the hybrid model maps input onto both types of representation in parallel. (LLM, conf=0.94)

  cites Diependaele et al., 2009 source
• ?Not matched

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

  cites Morris et al., 2011

In the paper

“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).”

What the sources say

• Supported

  The Dehaene et al. citation is attached to the increase in location-invariance, not the increased sensitivity to orthographic structure attributed to Vinckier et al. The Results and Discussion describe location-specific priming in posterior fusiform cortex and location-invariant priming farther anterior, mainly on the left. The tested location shift was one letter position. (LLM, conf=0.92)

  cites Dehaene et al., 2004 source
• Supported

  The Hierarchical Functional Organization section reports that left fusiform regions become progressively more selective for letter strings with complex, frequent components from posterior to anterior. The Analyses of ROIs section reports a significant posterior-to-anterior increase in selectivity for stimuli closer to real words. The sentence cites Dehaene et al. (2004), not Vinckier et al. (2007), for the accompanying increase in location-invariance. (LLM, conf=0.93)

  cites Vinckier et al., 2007 source

In the paper

“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).”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

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

  cites Grainger et al., 1991
• Supported

  The introduction says that, in the supralexical account, root representations impose an organization on lower-level form representations in terms of morphological families. The General Discussion (page unavailable in our copy) places morphemic representations above whole-word forms and describes them as an interface with meaning. Together, these passages support the paraphrase. (LLM, conf=0.91)

  cites Giraudo and Grainger, 2001 source

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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).”

In the paper

“However, identifying a unique orthographic word requires knowledge about where a given letter is in the word, not on the retina.”

In the paper

“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)”

In the paper

“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”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

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

  cites Grainger and Dufau, 2011

In the paper

“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”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

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

  cites Ellis and Young, 1988
• ?Not matched

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

  cites Coltheart et al., 1993, 2001
• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Zorzi, 2010 source

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“This allows orthographic information to make contact with pre-existing sublexical phonological and morphological representations.”

In the paper

“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).”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Coltheart et al., 2001 source
• ?Not matched

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

  cites Perry et al., 2007, 2010

In the paper

“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.”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

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

  cites Acha and Perea (2010)

In the paper

“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).”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

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

  cites Frankish and Turner, 2007
• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Frankish and Barnes, 2008 source

In the paper

“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.”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

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

  cites Braun et al., 2009

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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.””

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“However, in the present theoretical approach, the fine-grained orthographic processing route is not limited to the case of processing grapheme representations.”

In the paper

“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”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

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

  cites Jacobs et al. (1998)

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

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

  cites Grainger, 2008

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“Our dual-route approach to orthographic processing can be easily integrated within the more general framework of a BIAM of visual word recognition.”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“It is also thought to be the mechanism responsible for extracting other types of highly recurring contiguous letter combinations, such as affixes.”

In the paper

“Critically, morphological priming is larger than both form priming (scandal–scan) and semantic priming (giraffe–horse; see Diependaele et al., 2011 for review).”

What the sources say

• ?Not matched

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

  cites Diependaele et al., 2011

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Perry et al., 2007 source

In the paper

“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).”

In the paper

“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”

In the paper

“These phonological constraints could operate at the level of individual phonemes and phonological syllables, as in CDP++ (Perry et al., 2010).”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Perry et al., 2010 source

In the paper

“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).”

In the paper

“Here we hypothesize that such morpho-orthographic segmentation occurs along the fine-grained orthographic processing route of our model.”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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).”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ullman et al., 2002 source

In the paper

“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.”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Pacton and Perruchet, 2008 source

In the paper

“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).”

What the sources say

• ?Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Alario et al., 2007 source

In the paper

“According to our dual-route model, letter transpositions selectively interfere with fine-grained orthographic processing, and therefore selectively perturb sublexical morpho-orthographic segmentation.”

In the paper

“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.”

In the paper

“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.”