No abstract

Repetition blindness (RB) is the failure to report the second occurrence of a repeated word, when words are sequentially and briefly displayed (Kanwisher, 1987). RB is also observed for non-identical words, such as home, dome. Explanations for non-identity RB assume that similarity at the level of the whole word causes the second word to be suppressed ("similarity inhibition"). Three experiments demonstrate that RB is robust for diverse types of orthographic relatedness, including critical words that share only their first initial letter, their last two letters, first three letters, middle three letters, beginning and final letters, three alternating letters, and three non-aligned letters (as in chance hand). The theoretical construct of similarity inhibition may be able to account for these data, although one mechanism previously proposed in the literature, neighbourhood inhibition, is probably not a useful way to explain the data on RB for words sharing only one or two letters. We introduce an alternative explanation for orthographic RB: Only the repeated letters are suppressed, and amount of RB depends on how easily the perceiver can reconstruct the target word from the non-suppressed letters.

No abstract

Six experiments used an illusory words paradigm to demonstrate that repetition blindness (RB) in orthographically similar words affects only the words' shared letters. Rapid serial visual presentation streams of words and word fragments allowed the unique letters of the 2nd critical word to combine with a subsequent fragment to create a word, as in rock shock ell. The illusory word shell was reported 2-3 times as frequently in RB conditions as in control conditions. Further experiments ruled out letter migration, contour summation, and differences in processing load as explanations for the results. These findings are inconsistent with current proposals that orthographic RB represents similarity inhibition or lexical competition or that it reflects problems with word-level token individuation.

Early studies of human memory suggest that adherence to a known structural regularity (e.g., orthographic regularity) benefits memory for an otherwise novel stimulus (e.g., G. A. Miller, 1958). However, a more recent study suggests that structural regularity can lead to an increase in false-positive responses on recognition memory tests (B. W. A. Whittlesea & L. D. Williams, 1998). In the present study the authors attempted to identify the circumstances under which structural regularity benefits old-new discrimination and those under which it leads to an increase in false-positive responses. The highly generalizable tendency shown here is for structural regularity to benefit old-new discrimination. The increase in false-positive responses for structurally regular novel items may be limited to situations in which regularity is confounded with similarity to studied items.