Word length and exposure time effects on the recognition of bilaterally presented words

Gill, Kathleen; McKeever, Walter F.

doi:10.3758/bf03334234

Cited by 34 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Syllabicity has been shown to facilitate naming for difficult mono-and poly-syllabic words (e.g., Henderson, 1982;Taft, 1991). Length effects have been attested in both behavioural (Gill & McKeever, 1974;Lavidor & Ellis, 2002, among many others) and neurolinguistic studies (Cornelissen et al, 2003, Tarkiainen et al, 1999. The MEG literature, for example, typically shows detection of word-length effects around 150Á200 ms post-onset of visual word stimuli.…”

Section: Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compound words and structure in the lexicon

Fiorentino

Poeppel

2007

Language and Cognitive Processes

123

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The structure of lexical entries and the status of lexical decomposition remain controversial. In the psycholinguistic literature, one aspect of this debate concerns the psychological reality of the morphological complexity difference between compound words (teacup) and single words (crescent). The present study investigates morphological decomposition in compound words using visual lexical decision with simultaneous magnetoencephalography (MEG), comparing compounds, single words, and pseudomorphemic foils. The results support an account of lexical processing which includes early decomposition of morphologically complex words into constituents. The behavioural differences suggest internally structured representations for compound words, and the early effects of constituents in the electrophysiological signal support the hypothesis of early morphological parsing. These findings add to a growing literature suggesting that the lexicon includes structured representations, consistent with previous findings supporting early morphological parsing using other tasks. The results do not favour two putative constraints, word length and lexicalisation, on early morphological-structure based computation.

show abstract

Section: Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compound words and structure in the lexicon

Fiorentino

Poeppel

2007

Language and Cognitive Processes

123

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(2) Parafoveal presentation sharply increases response latency (Eriksen & Schultz, 1977;Lefton & Haber, 1974). (3) Recognition scores decrease with increasing word length in the parafovea (Gill & McKeever, 1974;Schiepers, 1976b). (4) Response latencies for foveally presented single words do not show an influence of word length (Dogget & Richards, 1975;Johnson, 1975;Terry et al, 1976).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response latency and accuracy in visual word recogniton

Schiepers¹

1980

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a single visual word recognition experiment, the effects of (11 eccentricity of presentation, (2)word length, and (3) word frequency were investigated. The stimuli used were Dutch nouns in two frequency classes of about 15 and 150.10-6 ; word length varied from 1 to 10; eccentricity varied from -4 to +4 deg. The response quality and response latency of 11 subjects were measured. For the correct responses, recognition scores decreased and response latencies increased with eccentricity; both showed asymmetrical curves in the visual field. It is argued that word length proper affects neither the probability of correct responses nor latency. A clear word frequency effect was established. The eccentricity of presentation is considered as the determinant of the amount of available information, thus directly influencing accuracy and latency. The linear relationship between accuracy and latency is a major finding. A word recognition scheme is offered which incorporates (1) activation, (2)decision, and (3) speech. The time relations between incoming retinal information and response decision, leading to an extra 400 msec for incorrect as compared with correct responses, are discussed. Word recognition in reading is examined, together with the impact of the present experimental results on information flow in successive eye fixations, eye movement control, and eye-voicespan.In the cognitive act of reading, several processes are involved: information is extracted from the text, processed, recognized, assigned a meaning, and, sometimes, uttered overtly. We are mainly interested in the visual reading processes, particularly in the cues for recognition. In printed text, words clearly form visual entities; in addition, words are emphasized in teaching people to read. We therefore work on the assumption that words are relevant units in visual reading processes.Both perceptual and linguistic factors contribute in word recognition (Neisser, 1967;Gibson & Levin, 1975). An important line of research at the Institute for Perception Research has been the specification of perceptual factors in single words in relation to the stimulus configuration (Bouma, 1971(Bouma, , 1973 Schiepers, 1976a Schiepers, , 1976bSchiepers, , 1978. The linguistic aspects of word recognition, on the other hand, are brought about the reader's knowledge of the language. Generally established linguistic factors affecting word recognition are, for example, word frequency (Broadbent, 1967;Rosenzweig & Postman, 1958), word meaning and redundancy by contrasting words vs. pseudowords vs. nonwords (Kolers, 1970;Wheeler, 1970), familiarity (Bouwhuis, 1979), and context (Morton, 1969). In our previous experiments (Schiepers, 1976b(Schiepers, , 1976c, word frequency and distributional constraints in the language were found to have only a minor influence. Probably, our experimental conditions, which imitate reading fixations as closely as possible, were responsible for a high transfer of stimulus information, thus giving prevalence to perceptual factors. In the exp...

show abstract

“…Several studies in the past have reported an interaction between visual hemifield (VHF) and word length such that the number of letters in a word has a stronger effect in the left visual field (LVF) than in the right visual field (RVF) (e.g., Bouma, 1973;Gill & McKeever, 1974). However, these studies did not control some of the other properties of the stimulus materials that are known to be correlated with word length, such as the imageability of stimulus words (Young, Bion, & Ellis, 1980).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Word Length and Orthographic Neighborhood Size Effects in the Left and Right Cerebral Hemispheres

Lavidor

Ellis

2002

Brain and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have reported an interaction between visual field (VF) and word length such that word recognition is affected more by length in the left VF (LVF) than in the right VF (RVF). A reanalysis showed that the previously reported effects of length were confounded with orthographic neighborhood size (N). In three experiments we manipulated length and N in lateralized lexical decision tasks. Results showed that length and VF interacted even with N controlled (Experiment 1); that N affected responses to words in the LVF but not the RVF (Experiment 2); and that when length and N were combined, length only affected performance in the LVF for words with few neighbors. © 2002 Elsevier Science (USA)

show abstract

Word length and exposure time effects on the recognition of bilaterally presented words

Cited by 34 publications

References 10 publications

Compound words and structure in the lexicon

Compound words and structure in the lexicon

Response latency and accuracy in visual word recogniton

Word Length and Orthographic Neighborhood Size Effects in the Left and Right Cerebral Hemispheres

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About