I see/hear what you mean: Semantic activation in visual word recognition depends on perceptual attention.

2014 ◽  
Vol 143 (2) ◽  
pp. 527-533 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Connell ◽  
Dermot Lynott
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Visual Word Recognition ◽  
Visual Word ◽  
Semantic Activation ◽  
Perceptual Attention

Does Viotin Activate Violin More Than Viocin?

2014 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Perea ◽  
Victoria Panadero
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Visual Word Recognition ◽  
Developmental Dyslexia ◽  
Computational Models ◽  
Error Rates ◽  
Visual Word ◽  
Base Word ◽  
Similar Response ◽  
Skilled Readers ◽  
Young Readers

The vast majority of neural and computational models of visual-word recognition assume that lexical access is achieved via the activation of abstract letter identities. Thus, a word’s overall shape should play no role in this process. In the present lexical decision experiment, we compared word-like pseudowords like viotín (same shape as its base word: violín) vs. viocín (different shape) in mature (college-aged skilled readers), immature (normally reading children), and immature/impaired (young readers with developmental dyslexia) word-recognition systems. Results revealed similar response times (and error rates) to consistent-shape and inconsistent-shape pseudowords for both adult skilled readers and normally reading children – this is consistent with current models of visual-word recognition. In contrast, young readers with developmental dyslexia made significantly more errors to viotín-like pseudowords than to viocín-like pseudowords. Thus, unlike normally reading children, young readers with developmental dyslexia are sensitive to a word’s visual cues, presumably because of poor letter representations.

The Sound of Enemies and Friends in the Neighborhood

2011 ◽  
Vol 58 (6) ◽  
pp. 454-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane Pecher ◽  
Inge Boot ◽  
Saskia van Dantzig ◽  
Carol J. Madden ◽  
David E. Huber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Visual Word Recognition ◽  
Neighborhood Effects ◽  
Classification Performance ◽  
Visual Word ◽  
Orthographic Neighborhood ◽  
Semantic Classification ◽  
Semantic Class ◽  
Orthographic Neighbors ◽  
Target Words

Previous studies (e.g., Pecher, Zeelenberg, & Wagenmakers, 2005) found that semantic classification performance is better for target words with orthographic neighbors that are mostly from the same semantic class (e.g., living) compared to target words with orthographic neighbors that are mostly from the opposite semantic class (e.g., nonliving). In the present study we investigated the contribution of phonology to orthographic neighborhood effects by comparing effects of phonologically congruent orthographic neighbors (book-hook) to phonologically incongruent orthographic neighbors (sand-wand). The prior presentation of a semantically congruent word produced larger effects on subsequent animacy decisions when the previously presented word was a phonologically congruent neighbor than when it was a phonologically incongruent neighbor. In a second experiment, performance differences between target words with versus without semantically congruent orthographic neighbors were larger if the orthographic neighbors were also phonologically congruent. These results support models of visual word recognition that assume an important role for phonology in cascaded access to meaning.

Consonants and Vowels in Visual Word Recognition: An MEG Study

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicola Molinaro ◽  
Mikel Lizarazu ◽  
Jon Andoni Dunabeitia ◽  
Manuel Carreiras
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Visual Word Recognition ◽  
Visual Word

Individual differences in visual word recognition: Insights from the ELP

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melvin J. Yap ◽  
David A. Balota ◽  
Daragh Sibley ◽  
Roger Ratcliff
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Visual Word Recognition ◽  
Visual Word
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document