|Author||James S. Adelman|
|File size||3.3 MB|
Visual Word Recognition
Word recognition is the component of reading which involves the identiﬁcation
of individual words. Together the two volumes of Visual Word Recognition
offer a state-of-the-art overview of contemporary research from leading ﬁgures
in the ﬁeld.
This ﬁrst volume outlines established theory, new models and key experimental evidence used to investigate visual word recognition: lexical decision and
word naming. It also considers methodological concerns: new developments in
large databases, and how these have been applied to theoretical questions; and
control considerations when dealing with words as stimuli. Finally, the book
considers the visual-orthographic input to the word recognition system: from the
left- and right-hand sides of vision, through the processing of letters and their
proximity, to the similarity and confusability of words, and the contribution of the
spoken-phonological form of the word.
The two volumes serve as a state-of-the-art, comprehensive overview of the
ﬁeld. They are essential reading for researchers of visual word recognition, as
well as undergraduate and postgraduate students of cognition and cognitive
psychology, speciﬁcally the psychology of language and reading. They will also
be of use to those working in education and speech-language therapy.
James S. Adelman ﬁrst became involved in visual word recognition research
whilst reading for a degree in Mathematics and Psychology at the University of
Liverpool. From there, he went on to complete a PhD and various externally
funded research projects at the University of Warwick, where he has been an
Assistant Professor since 2010.
Current Issues in the Psychology of Language
Series Editor: Trevor A. Harley
Current Issues in the Psychology of Language is a series of edited books that will
reﬂect the state-of-the-art in areas of current and emerging interest in the psychological study of language.
Each volume is tightly focused on a particular topic and consists of seven to
ten chapters contributed by international experts. The editors of individual
volumes are leading ﬁgures in their areas and provide an introductory overview.
Example topics include: language development, bilingualism and second
language acquisition, word recognition, word meaning, text processing, the
neuroscience of language, and language production, as well as the inter-relations
between these topics.
Visual Word Recognition Volume 1
Edited by James S. Adelman
Visual Word Recognition Volume 2
Edited by James S. Adelman
Edited by Roger van Gompel
Visual Word Recognition
Models and methods, orthography,
James S. Adelman
First edition published 2012
27 Church Road, Hove, East Sussex, BN3 2FA
Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada
by Psychology Press
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Psychology Press is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2012 Psychology Press
The right of the editor to be identiﬁed as the author of the editorial material,
and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance
with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means,
now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording,
or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publishers.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Visual word recognition: Models and methods, orthography and phonology /
Edited by James S. Adelman, University of Warwick.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-84872-058-9 (hb)
1. Word recognition. I. Adelman, James S.
ISBN13: 978-1-84872-058-9 (hbk)
ISBN13: 978-0-20310-701-0 (ebk)
Typeset in Times New Roman
by Cenveo Publisher Services
List of Figures
List of Tables
List of Contributors
J A M E S S . A D E L MAN
Dual-route theories of reading aloud
M A X C O L T H E ART
Learned orthographic representations facilitates large-scale
modeling of word recognition
D A R A G H E . S I BL E Y AND CHRI S T OP HE R T . KE L LO
A parallel activation model with a sequential twist
K E N N E T H I . F ORS T E R
Mathematical models of the lexical decision task
Megastudies: What do millions (or so) of trials tell us about
D A V I D A . B A L O T A, ME L VI N J. YAP , KE I T H A. H U TC H ISO N ,
A N D M I C H A E L J. CORT E S E
Methodological issues with words
J A M E S S . A D E L MAN
7 Brain asymmetry and visual word recognition: Do we have
a split fovea?
M A R C B R Y SBAE RT , QI NG CAI , AND L I S E VAN D ER H A EG EN
8 The front end of visual word recognition
J O N A T H A N G RAI NGE R AND S T É P HANE DUF AU
9 The orthographic similarity of printed words
C O L I N J . D A VI S
10 Phonology: An early and integral role in identifying words
L A U R A K . HAL DE RMAN, JANE AS HBY, AND CH A R LES A . PERFETTI
List of Figures
The dual-route model of reading proposed by Marshall
and Newcombe (1973). With kind permission from Springer
Science+Business Media: Figure 1 of Marshall, J.C., & Newcombe,
F. (1973). Patterns of paralexia: A psycholinguistic approach.
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2, 175–99.
2.1 General sequence encoder architecture. The letters of a word
are presented sequentially to the Encoding SRN (simple recurrent
network), where they are integrated into a learned orthographic
representation. This representation is then copied to the
Decoding SRN and used to regenerate the original sequence
2.2 Orthographic sequence encoder performance, by length. A word
was decoded correctly if every letter, or end-of-wordform
output unit was activated in the correct sequence.
2.3 Word and nonword distributions. Distributions of 28,032 words
and 27,881 nonwords are shown along a continuum of
familiarity deﬁned by Equation 2.3.
6.1 Neighbourhoods of SOAP.
7.1 Correlation between handedness (measured from extreme right
[score 10] to extreme left [score 50]) and activation laterality
in the inferior frontal gyrus. The authors deﬁned laterality scores
larger than +25 as evidence for left hemisphere dominance, scores
lower than −25 as evidence for right hemisphere dominance,
and scores in-between as evidence for bilateral speech control.
Source: Pujol et al., 1999.
7.2 Figure of the left hemisphere showing the frontal areas active
in word generation and the visual word form area, as postulated
by Cohen and colleagues. Posterior to the visual word form area
is a part of the occipital cortex, the middle occipital gyrus, that
is also particularly active in written word recognition. It is left
lateralised in typical healthy participants as well (Gold &
Rastle, 2007), but was not correlated with the activity in the
frontal language areas in Cai et al. (2010).
List of Figures
Organisation of the visual system. Because the optic ﬁbres coming
from the nasal halves of the retina cross to the other hemisphere,
all stimuli presented to the left of the ﬁxation location are initially
sent to the right cerebral hemisphere and all stimuli presented
to the right of the ﬁxation location are initially sent to the left
cerebral hemisphere. LGN = Lateral Geniculate Nucleus.
7.4 Left panel: Illustration of the Optimal Viewing Position paradigm
with fourletter words. A trial starts with the appearance of two
vertical lines slightly above and below the centre of the computer
screen. Participants are asked to ﬁxate between the two lines.
After a brief interval a four-letter word is presented between
the lines. Participants have to name the word as fast as possible.
On different trials, the word is presented in such a way that
participants look on the ﬁrst, the second, the third, or the last
letter. Right panel: Word naming times of four-letter words
(relative to the group average) for left dominant and right-dominant
participants as a function of the ﬁxation position within the word.
Participants with left speech dominance named foveally
presented four-letter words faster when they were presented in
such a way that the participants were ﬁxating on the second letter,
whereas participants with right speech dominance had an advantage
for words presented in such a way that participants were ﬁxating
on the last letter. Notice that the effect is gradual, not only present
for ﬁxations on the extreme letter positions but also for ﬁxations
on the inner letters. Reproduced with permission from MIT Press
from Hunter, Z. R., Brysbaert, M., and Knecht, S. (2007).
Foveal word reading requires interhemispheric communication.
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 1373–1387. ©MIT Press.
8.1 Solving shape invariance for letters and words. A solution based
on wholeword representations would involve associating the
different formats of a given word to an abstract representation
of that word for each of the words in the vocabulary. Much
more economical, a solution involving letter-based word
recognition would only require shape-invariant representations
for the 26 letters of the alphabet.
8.2 A picture of an animal (top) and a printed word (bottom)
after ﬁltering out the high spatial frequencies. Can you
8.3 Adaptation of Riesenhuber and Poggio’s (1999) model of object
identiﬁcation to the case of letter perception (Grainger et al.,
2008). Information about simple visual features (lines of different
orientation at precise locations in the visual ﬁeld) extracted from
the visual stimulus is progressively pooled across different
locations (complex cells) and feature combinations (composite
List of Figures
cells) as one moves up the processing hierarchy. Reprinted from
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Vol. 12, Jonathan Grainger,
Arnaud Rey and Stéphane Dufau, ‘Letter perception: from
pixels to pandemonium,’ pp. 381–387, © 2008, with permission
Grainger and van Heuven’s model of orthographic processing.
Location-speciﬁc letter detectors (alphabetic array) send
information on to a sublexical, word-centered, orthographic
code (relative position map), which in turn activates whole-word
orthographic representations (O-words). The word-centered
sublexical orthographic code is formed of location-invariant
ordered combinations of contiguous and non-contiguous letters.
Serial positions functions from Tydgat and Grainger (2009,
Experiment 5). Percent correct post-cued identiﬁcation at the
different positions in ﬁve-character arrays of random consonants,
symbols, or digits. Participants were shown brieﬂy presented
strings of ﬁve characters followed by a pattern mask, and were
asked to identify the character that was present in the string at a
postcued location. Tydgat, I. and Grainger, J. (2009). Serial
position effects in the identiﬁcation of letters, digits and symbols.
Reprinted with permission from Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 480–498,
published by American Psychological Association.
Variation in visual acuity along the horizontal meridian (from
Figure 2.3 of Just, Marcel Adam; Carpenter, Patricia, Psychology
of Reading and Language Comprehension, 1st Edition, © 1987.
Reprinted by permission of Pearson Education, Inc., Upper
Saddle River, NJ.).
A dual-route approach to orthographic processing (Grainger
& Ziegler, 2011). Starting from location-speciﬁc letter detectors,
two fundamentally different types of location-invariant sublexical
orthographic code are computed. A coarse-grained code optimizes
the mapping of orthography to semantics by selecting letter
combinations that are the most informative with respect to word
identity, irrespective of letter contiguity. A ﬁne-grained code
optimizes processing via the chunking of frequently co-occurring
The left side shows an example of a backward masking trial
using a phonologically similar nonword mask. A trial begins
with a forward pattern mask (e.g., XXXX) that is followed by
the target (e.g., crew). A nonword mask immediately follows
the target and can be related to the target phonologically (e.g.,
KROO), orthographically (e.g., CRAE), both (e.g., CRUE) or
unrelated baseline condition (e.g., GILF). A trial ends with
another pattern mask. The right shows an example of a masked
List of Figures
priming trial using an orthographic control nonword mask.
In both cases, the targets and nonword masks or primes are
presented very brieﬂy (i.e., 14–66 ms each).
10.2 The left hemisphere reading network with approximate time
estimates of activation onset, summarized from the
time-frequency MEG analyses.
10.3 The multiple layers of phonological information (e.g., Clements
& Keyser, 1983) that skilled readers typically activate en route
to word recognition, based on evidence from behavioral,
eye-movement, and neurophysiological experiments that tap
automatic phonological processes.
List of Tables
Six variants of the triangle model of reading aloud.
O = orthography, P = Phonology, S = Semantics
Some readings of nonwords by the CDP+ model which seem
unlikely ever to be produced by any human skilled reader
R2 (%) from lexical variables predicting ELP or simulated
latencies. All of the relationships were statistically signiﬁcant
(p < 0.05) and in the same direction in ELP and simulation
A set of data that might occur under the null hypothesis
for Case 1
A set of data that might occur under the alternative hypothesis
for Case 1; in fact the same data as Table 6.1
Fit to the data from Tables 6.1 and 6.2 for the null hypothesis
for Case 1
Fit to the data from Tables 6.1 and 6.2 for the alternative
hypothesis for Case 1
Fit to the data for the alternative hypothesis for Case 2
Fit to further data for the alternative hypothesis for Case 2
Fit to further data for the null hypothesis for Case 2
Words differing in some property C, and listwise matched on
frequency and regularity (but not the interaction). Even if
C has no effect, the expected RTs [E(RT)] differ on average.
Regularity is dummy-coded (0 = exception; 1 = regular)
Average phonological facilitation beyond orthographic
facilitation and average effect sizes reported in Rastle and
Brysbaert’s (2006) meta-analysis
List of Contributors
James S. Adelman, Department of Psychology, University of Warwick, Gibbet
Hill Road, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
Jane Ashby, Psychology Department, Central Michigan University, Mount
Pleasant, MI 48859, USA
David A. Balota, Department of Psychology, Washington University in
St. Louis, Campus Box 1125, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA
Marc Brysbaert, Department of Experimental Psychology, Ghent University,
Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium
Qing Cai, Department of Experimental Psychology, Ghent University, Henri
Dunantlaan 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium
Max Coltheart, Centre for Cognition and its Disorders and Macquarie Centre
for Cognitive Science, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia
Michael J. Cortese, Psychology Department, University of Nebraska-Omaha,
Omaha, NE 68182, USA
Colin J. Davis, Department of Psychology, Royal Holloway University of
London, Egham, TW20 0EX, UK
Stéphane Dufau, Université d’Aix-Marseille, Pôle 3 C, LPC/CNRS/UMR 6146,
3, place Victor Hugo, Bat. 9, Case D, 13331 Marseille Cedex 1, France
Kenneth I. Forster, Department of Psychology, University of Arizona, Tucson,
AZ 85721, USA
List of Contributors
Pablo Gomez, DePaul University, Department of Psychology, 2219 North
Kenmore Avenue, Chicago, IL 60614, USA
Jonathan Grainger, Université d'Aix-Marseille, Pôle 3 C, LPC/CNRS/UMR
6146, 3, place Victor Hugo, Bat. 9, Case D, 13331 Marseille Cedex 1, France
Laura K. Halderman, Learning Research and Development Center, University
of Pittsburgh, 3939 O’Hara Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA
Keith A. Hutchison, Department of Psychology, Montana State University,
P.O. Box 173440 Bozeman, MT 59717, USA
Christopher T. Kello, School of Social Sciences, Humanities and Arts,
University of California, Merced, 5200 North Lake Road, Merced, CA 95343,
Charles A. Perfetti, Learning Research and Development Center, University of
Pittsburgh, 3939 O’Hara Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA
Daragh E. Sibley, Haskins Laboratories, 300 George Street, New Haven, CT
Lise Van der Haegen, Department of Experimental Psychology, Ghent
University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium
Melvin J. Yap, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences,
National University of Singapore, 9 Arts Link, Singapore 117570, Singapore
I thank the contributors for their efforts and Suzanne Marquis for her aid in
reminding contributors of their promises. Preparation of this book was supported
in part by Economic and Social Research Council (UK) grant RES-062-23-0545.
Figure 1.1 is reproduced with kind permission from Springer Science+Business
Media from Figure 1 of Marshall, J.C. and Newcombe, F. (1973). Patterns of
paralexia: A psycholinguistic approach. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2,
175–199. Psychology Press have detailed of Figure 7.1 Figure 7.4 is reproduced
with permission from MIT Press from Hunter, Z.R., Brysbaert, M., and Knecht,
S. (2007). Foveal word reading requires interhemispheric communication.
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 1373–1387. © MIT Press. Figure 8.3 is
reproduced from Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Vol. 12, Jonathan Grainger,
Arnaud Rey, and Stéphane Dufau, “Letter perception: from pixels to pandemonium,” pp. 381–387, © 2008, with permission from Elsevier. Figure 8.5 is from
Tydgat, I. and Grainger, J. (2009). Serial position effects in the identiﬁcation
of letters, digits and symbols. Reprinted with permission from Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 480–498,
published by American Psychological Association. Figure 8.6 is from Figure 2.3
of Just, Marcel Adam; Carpenter, Patricia, Psychology of Reading and Language
Comprehension, 1st Edition, © 1987. Reprinted by permission of Pearson
Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.
James S. Adelman
Words are the building blocks of language, and are the interface between written
and spoken language. Recognition of the printed word is both essential to the
important skill of reading and among the easiest routes for the experimenter to
access higher cognition. In this light, it is little surprise that the identiﬁcation and
pronunciation of written (or more often, printed) words are among the earliest
studied (Cattell, 1886) and most studied aspects of cognition.
Visual word recognition is studied both in its own right, in terms of the processes of recognizing a word and the performance of word-based tasks, but also
more broadly in context as a link to semantics and concepts, cognitive individual
differences, reading prose and learning to read. This volume concentrates on the
former, narrower, form of study of visual word recognition, whilst its companion
concentrates on the latter, broader form of study.
Chapters 1 through 4 consider the theoretical underpinnings of the study of
visual word recognition. In Chapter 1, Coltheart argues that current models of
reading aloud all posit two routes, and considers the evidence concerning the
nature of these routes. In Chapter 2, Sibley and Kello describe a connectionist
recurrent network model of the learning of orthographic representations, and
argue that the manner of learning accounts for key properties of behaviour in
lexical decision. In Chapter 3, Forster presents a model that incorporates properties of both serial search and network models, arguing that this approach has key
advantages in understanding how multiple words can be active in the reading
system. In Chapter 4, Gomez surveys the vast array of models of the lexical decision, which, he shows, vary in their emphasis on the lexical and the decision
components of the process.
Chapters 5 and 6 are more methodologically focussed. First, Balota and
colleagues survey ‘mega-studies’: large studies involving many words and
participants whose data are made available for analysis by the research community, and they consider how these studies have given rise to contributions that
complement those from more traditionally sized studies. Then I consider the item
selection and statistical analysis issues involved in working with characteristics
of words as theoretically important predictors, considering how to control by
design known factors affecting visual word recognition, and how to control by
statistics unknown factors affecting visual word recognition.
James S. Adelman
The remaining chapters consider the inputs to the visual word recognition
system at various levels. In Chapter 7, Brysbaert and colleagues argue that
even in central vision, the left and right halves of an eye’s view are initially processed separately, being sent to different halves of the brain, and then must be
integrated for effective reading to begin. In Chapter 8, Grainger and Dufau
consider the mechanisms of processing letters through into words, arguing that
there is specialized processing for letters and that two systems map letters
onto words, the systems differing in how they deal with positional information.
In Chapter 9, Davis considers this matching process for mapping letters onto
words and considers the different forms of stimulus that may be considered ‘similar’ to a word insofar as it affects processing of that word. Finally, Halderman
and colleagues argue that the phonological representation of a word is not merely
an outcome of the attempt to visually identify that word, but plays a key role in
its identiﬁcation from a very early stage.
In sum, these chapters cover the key issues involved in understanding the
processing of the written word in terms of its written and spoken forms.
Visual word recognition is a constituent process of reading.
Cattell, J. M. (1886). The time taken up by cerebral operations. Mind, 11, 377–92. Retrieved
Dual-route theories of
At the 1971 meeting of the International Neuropsychology Symposium in
Engelberg, Switzerland, John Marshall and Freda Newcombe described six
people who had suffered brain damage that had affected their ability to read – six
case of acquired dyslexia. These six people fell into three different categories,
since the pattern of reading symptoms they showed differed qualitatively as a
function of which category they were assigned to. The three categories of
acquired dyslexia were named ‘deep dyslexia’, ‘surface dyslexia’ and ‘visual
The publication of this work two years later (Marshall & Newcombe, 1973)
initiated a major research ﬁeld – the cognitive neuropsychology of reading. It did
this not so much because it emphasized that there are different subtypes of
acquired dyslexia – though this was a very important thing to demonstrate – but
because the authors offered an explicit information-processing model of reading
aloud and suggested how each of the three forms of acquired dyslexia could be
understood as generated by three different patterns of impairment of that model.
Their model is shown in Figure 1.1. It is a dual-route model of reading aloud
(though Marshall and Newcombe did not use the term ‘dual route’) because there
are two processing routes from print (the stimulus) to speech (the response). One
route is via Visual Addresses through Semantic Addresses to articulation. This
route can only be used with those letter strings that possess semantic addresses –
that is, only with words. The route cannot produce reading-aloud responses for
How Marshall and Newcombe conceived of the second route for reading aloud
(the A→B→D→T→F route) is not entirely clear from the Figure 1.1 diagram;
but it is perfectly clear from their paper: ‘If . . . as a consequence of brain damage,
the functional pathway bc (Fig. 1) is usually unavailable, the subject will have no
option other than attempting to read via putative grapheme-phoneme correspondence rules (pathway bd)’ (Marshall & Newcombe, 1973, p. 191).
A processing route that translates print to speech by application of graphemephoneme correspondence rules will be able to read letter strings that are not words.
However, by deﬁnition it will fail for letter strings whose pronunciations differs
from the pronunciations generated by the grapheme-phoneme correspondence
Figure 1.1 The dual-route model of reading proposed by Marshall and Newcombe (1973).
With kind permission from Springer Science+Business Media: Figure 1 of
Marshall, J.C., & Newcombe, F. (1973). Patterns of paralexia: A psycholinguistic approach. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2, 175–199.
rules of the language: the so-called irregular or exception words1 of the language.
Marshall and Newcombe did not quite make this point about irregular words
and the second reading route, but they clearly had it in mind: ‘a recent
formalism . . . proposes 166 correspondence rules in an analysis of children’s reading books. These rules only account for 90% of the data, leaving 10% of quite
common words provided with an incorrect pronunciation’ (Marshall & Newcombe,
1973, p. 191).
The dual-route model of reading aloud was proposed independently in the
same year by Forster and Chambers (1973).
The pronunciation of a visually-presented word involves assigning to a
sequence of letters some kind of acoustic or articulatory coding. There are
presumably two alternative ways in which this coding can be assigned. First,
the pronunciation could be computed by application of a set of graphemephoneme or letter-sound correspondence rules. This coding can be carried out
independently of any consideration of the meaning or familiarity of the letter sequence, as in the pronunciation of previously unencountered sequences,
such as ﬂitch, mantiness, and streep. Alternatively, the pronunciation may be
determined by searching long-term memory for stored information about how
to pronounce familiar letter sequences, obtaining the necessary information
Dual-route theories of reading aloud 5
by a direct dictionary look-up, instead of rule-application. Obviously this
procedure would only work for familiar words.
(Forster & Chambers, 1973, p. 627)
These authors did not raise the issue of irregular words (words whose pronunciations disobey grapheme-phoneme rules and so could not be correctly read
aloud using the grapheme-phoneme rule route).
After this dual introduction of the dual-route model of reading aloud, the idea
spread rapidly, for example:
We can . . . distinguish between an orthographic mechanism, which makes
use of such general and productive relationships between letter patterns and
sounds as exist, and a lexical mechanism, which relies instead upon speciﬁc
knowledge of pronunciations of particular words or morphemes, that is, a
lexicon of pronunciations (if not meanings as well) . . . It seems that both
of the mechanisms we have suggested, the orthographic and lexical mechanisms, are used for pronouncing printed words.
(Baron & Strawson, 1976, pp. 386, 391)
Naming can be accomplished either by orthographic-phonemic translation,
or by reference to the internal lexicon.
(Frederiksen & Kroll, 1976, p. 378)
Given the central role played by the concept of irregularity of graphemephoneme correspondence in the dual-route approach, what was clearly needed
next was empirical investigation of the inﬂuence of such irregularity on the reading aloud of words. If regular words (those which obey the correspondence rules)
can be read aloud correctly via the rule route and also by the dictionary lookup
route, while irregular words can only be read aloud correctly by the dictionary
lookup route, one might expect this to result in reading-aloud latencies being
shorter for regular words than for irregular words. This was ﬁrst investigated by
Baron and Strawson (1976), who did indeed ﬁnd that reading aloud was slower
for irregular words than for regular words.
At this point, it is necessary to say something more, by way of deﬁnition, about
the concept of regularity and also about another concept, consistency, which also
became important in reading research from the late 1970s onwards.
The concepts of regularity and consistency
To produce perfectly clear terminology here, we need some deﬁnitions. To deﬁne
the irregular/regular distinction, we ﬁrst need to deﬁne the term grapheme.
Relationships between spellings and pronunciations are often referred to as being
governed by letter–sound rules, but that’s incorrect. The word THIGH has ﬁve
letters. So if it were literally letters that were being translated to sounds
(phonemes), this word would have ﬁve phonemes; but it doesn’t, it has only two.
Author James S. Adelman Isbn 9781848720589 File size 3.3 MB Year 2012 Pages 248 Language English File format PDF Category Psychology Book Description: FacebookTwitterGoogle+TumblrDiggMySpaceShare Word recognition is the component of reading which involves the identification of individual words. Together the two volumes of Visual Word Recognition offer a state-of-the-art overview of contemporary research from leading figures in the field. This first volume outlines established theory, new models and key experimental evidence used to investigate visual word recognition: lexical decision and word naming. It also considers methodological concerns: new developments in large databases, and how these have been applied to theoretical questions; and control considerations when dealing with words as stimuli. Finally, the book considers the visual-orthographic input to the word recognition system: from the left and right-hand sides of vision, through the processing of letters and their proximity, to the similarity and confusability of words, and the contribution of the spoken-phonological form of the word. The two volumes serve as a state-of-the-art, comprehensive overview of the field. They are essential reading for researchers of visual word recognition, as well as undergraduate and postgraduate students of cognition and cognitive psychology, specifically the psychology of language and reading. They will also be of use to those working in education and speech-language therapy. Download (3.3 MB) Visual Word Recognition Volume 2: Meaning and Context, Individuals and Development Dimensions of Movement: From features to remnants The New Psychology of Language Cognitive Illusions: Intriguing Phenomena in Judgement, Thinking and Memory, 2nd Edition Desire, Self, Mind, and the Psychotherapies: Unifying Psychological Science and Psychoanalysis Load more posts