scholarly journals Age of acquisition and visual field asymmetry in word recognition

1982 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 486-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
David B. Boles ◽  
Steven Rogers ◽  
William Wymer
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Age Of Acquisition

Lateral Word Recognition: Effects of Unilateral and Bilateral Presentation, Asynchrony of Bilateral Presentation, and Forced Order of Report

1971 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 410-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter F. McKeever
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Left Visual Field ◽  
Right Visual Field ◽  
Bilateral Presentation

This experiment enquired: (1) whether right visual field (RVF) recognition superiority was greater in bilateral than in unilateral word presentation; (2) whether left field-favouring attentional or recall sets could be induced by presenting left visual field (LVF) words 20 msec prior to RVF words or by instructions to report LVF words prior to RVF words. Results showed: (1) all conditions studied yielded significant RVF superiority; (2) RVF superiority magnitude was significantly greater in bilateral than in unilateral presentation, suggesting the tenability of hypotheses that different mechanisms operate in these conditions; (3) neither earlier delivery nor earlier report of LVF words altered the pattern of RVF superiority in bilateral presentation, the later result demonstrating that differential receptive organization rather than differential recall of the two stimuli is responsible for RVF superiority in bilateral presentation.

The Computational Exploration of Visual Word Recognition in a Split Model

2001 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 1171-1198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Shillcock ◽  
Padraic Monaghan
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Visual Word Recognition ◽  
Visual Input ◽  
Visual Word ◽  
Connectionist Model ◽  
Computational Exploration ◽  
Contralateral Projection ◽  
Psychological Evidence ◽  
Random Patterns

We argue that the projection of the visual field to the cortex constrains and informs the modeling of visual word recognition. On the basis of anatomical and psychological evidence, we claim that the higher-level cognition involved in word recognition does not completely transcend initial foveal splitting. We present a schematic connectionist model of word recognition that instantiates the precise splitting of the visual field and the contralateral projection of the two hemifields. We explore the special nature of the exterior (i.e., first and last) letters of words in reading. The model produces the correct behavior spontaneously and robustly. We analyze this behavior of the model with respect to words and random patterns and conclude that the systematic division of the visual input has predictable, general informational consequences and is chiefly responsible for the exterior letters effect.

Age of acquisition modulates the amplitude of the P300 component in spoken word recognition

2005 ◽  
Vol 379 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-Josèphe Tainturier ◽  
Jakke Tamminen ◽  
Guillaume Thierry
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Spoken Word Recognition ◽  
Age Of Acquisition ◽  
Spoken Word ◽  
P300 Component

The Search for Common Ground

2004 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 877-890 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Windsor ◽  
Kathryn Kohnert
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Picture Naming ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Age Of Acquisition ◽  
English Only ◽  
Lower Accuracy ◽  
Primary Language Impairment

This study examines lexical performance by 3 groups of linguistically diverse school-age learners: English-only speakers with primary language impairment (LI), typical English-only speakers (EO), and typical bilingual Spanish-English speakers (BI). The accuracy and response time (RT) of 100 8- to 13-year-old children in word recognition and picture-naming tasks were analyzed. Within each task, stimulus difficulty was manipulated to include very easy stimuli (words that were high frequency/had an early age of acquisition in English) and more difficult stimuli (words of low frequency/late age of acquisition [AOA]). There was no difference among groups in real-word recognition accuracy or RT; all 3 groups showed lower accuracy with low-frequency words. In picture naming, all 3 groups showed a longer RT for words with a late AOA, although AOA had a disproportionate negative impact on BI performance. The EO group was faster and more accurate than both LI and BI groups in conditions with later acquired stimuli. Results are discussed in terms of quantitative differences separating EO children from the other 2 groups and qualitative similarities linking monolingual children with and without LI.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document