Is nevtral NEUTRAL? Visual similarity effects in the early phases of written-word recognition

2018

Psicológica Journal

Self Cite

For simplicity, models of visual-word recognition have focused on printed words composed of separated letters, thus overlooking the processing of cursive words. Manso de Zuniga, Humphreys, and Evett (1991) claimed that there is an early “cursive normalization” encoding stage when processing written words with joined letters. To test this claim, we conducted a lexical decision experiment in which words were presented either with separated or joined letters. To examine if the cost of letter segmentation occurs early in processing, we also manipulated a factor (i.e., word-frequency) that is posited to affect subsequent lexical processing. Results showed faster response times for the words composed of separated letters than for the words composed of joined letters. This effect occurred similarly for low- and high-frequency words. Thus, the present data offer some empirical support to Manso de Zuniga et al.’s (1991) idea of an early “cursive normalization” stage when processing joined-letters words. This pattern of data can be used to constrain the mapping of the visual input into letter and word units in future versions of models of visual word recognition.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is there a cost at encoding words with joined letters during visual word recognition?

Roldán

2018

Psicológica Journal

Self Cite

show abstract

“…To assess how effective the visually similar primes were, they also included an identity condition. Marcet and Perea (2017) found faster word identification times in the visually similar substituted-letter condition than in the visually dissimilar substituted-letter condition (e.g., dentjst-DENTIST was responded to faster than dentgst-DENTIST). Furthermore, the visually similar substituted-letter condition produced word identification times that were only slightly slower than those in the identity condition (see also Marcet & Perea, 2018b, for evidence of this pattern during sentence reading using the boundary technique).…”

mentioning

confidence: 84%

“…For letter-replacement primes, word identification times were faster for HRHNDONabandon than for DWDNDON-abandon, but the difference only approached significance (p = 0.09). More recently, Marcet and Perea (2017) conducted two masked priming lexical decision experiments with a larger number of data points per condition than in the Kinoshita et al (2013) experiment (2,160 vs. 740, respectively). To create the replaced-letter primes from the target words, Marcet and Perea (2017) substituted a single letter that was visually very similar (e.g., i→j, as in dentjst-DENTIST) or not (e.g., i→g, dentgst-DENTIST) using the Simpson et al (2012) ratings of visual letter similarity.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the present experiments, we recorded both behavioral (word identification times, accuracy) and event-related potential (ERP) measures to target stimuli preceded by a masked prime. The priming conditions were the same as in the behavioral experiments conducted by Marcet and Perea (2017): (a) a visually similar one-letter replacement prime [SIM] (e.g., dentjst-DENTIST); (b) a visually dissimilar one-letter replacement prime [DIS] (e.g., dentgst-DENTIST); and (c) an identity prime [ID] (e.g., dentist-DENTIST). As in the Marcet and Perea (2017) experiments, the visually similar letters were i/j (Experiment 1) and u/v (Experiment 2); these pairs of letters are visually very similar in letter confusability ratings (5.17 and 4.93 out of 7, respectively, in ratings of Simpsons et al, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The priming conditions were the same as in the behavioral experiments conducted by Marcet and Perea (2017): (a) a visually similar one-letter replacement prime [SIM] (e.g., dentjst-DENTIST); (b) a visually dissimilar one-letter replacement prime [DIS] (e.g., dentgst-DENTIST); and (c) an identity prime [ID] (e.g., dentist-DENTIST). As in the Marcet and Perea (2017) experiments, the visually similar letters were i/j (Experiment 1) and u/v (Experiment 2); these pairs of letters are visually very similar in letter confusability ratings (5.17 and 4.93 out of 7, respectively, in ratings of Simpsons et al, 2012). Behaviorally, we expect faster word identification times in the visually similar (SIM) letter condition than in the visually dissimilar (DIS) letter condition (e.g., dentjst-DENTIST faster than dentgst-DENTIST) (i.e., the same pattern as in the Marcet & Perea, 2017, experiments).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Tracking the time course of letter visual-similarity effects during word recognition: A masked priming ERP investigation

Gutiérrez-Sigut

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

2019

Self Cite

Visual similarity effects during the early stages of word processing have been consistently found for letter-like digits and symbols. However, despite its relevance for models of word recognition, evidence for letter visual-similarity effects is scarce and restricted to behavioral experiments. In two masked priming experiments, we measured event-related potential (ERP) responses to words preceded by an identical (dentist-DENTIST), a visually similar (dentjst-DENTIST), or a visually dissimilar prime (dentgst-DENTIST) to track the time course of the effects of letter visual-similarity during word processing. In the 230-to 350-ms time window, the ERPs in the visual dissimilar condition showed larger negative-going amplitudes than in the visual similar condition, which in turn behaved like the identity condition. In a later time window (400-500 ms), the visually similar condition elicited larger negative-going amplitudes than the identity condition. This pattern of findings can be accommodated within those models of word recognition that assume uncertainty concerning letter identities early in word processing that is resolved over time. Keywords Word recognition. Event-related potentials. Lexical decision. Masked priming The process of visual word recognition in skilled readers involves extremely efficient mechanisms that, in a few hundreds of milliseconds, convert the visual signal into the appropriate long-term lexical representation despite the similarity between letters (e.g., prescribe, but not the visually similar word proscribe) (see Grainger, 2018; Grainger, Dufau, and Ziegler, 2016, for recent reviews). However, visual similarity among stimuli seems to influence this process. Previous research has shown that sentences in which some of the letters are replaced by similar symbols or digits (e.g., MΔT3R1ΔL 7H1NGS C0M3 ΔND G0) can be read without much cost (Duñabeitia, Perea, and Carreiras, 2009). Indeed, a number of experiments using Forster andDavis'(1984) masked priming technique (i.e.,a procedure that taps the initial stages of word processing; Grainger, 2008) have consistently reported facilitative effects of visual similarity with letter-like digits and letter-like symbols during word recognition. In the initial demonstration of the effect, Perea, Duñabeitia, and Carreiras (2008) found faster lexical decision times to a target word like MATERIAL when preceded by a prime with similar letter-like digits (M473RI4L) or symbols (MΔT€R!ΔL) than when preceded by a dissimilar prime (M568RI2L or M□T%R?□L). Furthermore, Perea et al. (2008) found that visually similar primes were nearly as effective as the identity primes (see also Kinoshita, Robidoux, Mills, & Norris, 2013; Perea, Duñabeitia, Pollatsek, & Carreiras, 2009, for converging behavioral evidence). Molinaro, Duñabeitia, Marìn-Gutiérrez, and Carreiras (2010) used event-related potentials (ERPs) to examine the time course of visual similarity effects with words containing similar letter-like digits. In their masked priming experiment, targets that were prece...

show abstract

Does a mark make a difference? Visual similarity effects with accented vowels

Baciero

2020

Psychological Research