Visual Word
Recognition
Language Use and Understanding
Class 15: Van Orden
Announcements

Final exam: May 5, 9-12 am, in Meliora
366
Note: different room/time than scheduled

Coming up:

Wed: Castles & Coltheart (MR presenting)

Gernsbacher
 Mon 3/22: Fodor (Anthony presenting)
 Wed 3/24: discuss results
 Mon: 3/29: Elman & McClelland (Mtan

Language Comprehension

Research Q: How do we extract meaning
from the linguistic signal?
Major issues

What information is used for processing
decisions?


When does each piece of information get
integrated? (What is the time course of
processing?)
Cognitive architecture - encapsulated or
not?
Interaction of different levels
 Linguistic vs. nonlinguistic sources of
information

Levels of Processing

Comprehension
Sound / speech perception
 Visual and Spoken Word recognition

Representations of words
 Matching of signal with words



Word segmentation
Ambiguity
Sentence Processing
 Discourse Processing
 Role of Prosody

Word Recognition

How do we read words?

What processes/representations are
involved?
Models of reading

Direct access mode of reading:
orthography


Phonolgical mediation


Red --> sequence of letters is linked to a
stored memory of lexical item
Red --> /rEd/ --> sounds linked to a stored
memory of lexical item
Dual-access theories - both used, but what
is relation between them?
Word Recognition

How do we read words?

What processes/representations are
involved?
Written word
Orthographic information
Phonological information
Lexical Representation
-Phonological rep.
-Orthographic rep.
A separate question…

Does reading use “rules” or “distributed
representations”?

More on this next week…
Van Orden’s Q’s:
1. Does phonological mediation occur?
 2. What is time course of orthographic
and phonological influences?
 3. Does word identification include a
verification process?

Phonological Mediation

What is the previously existing evidence?

Lexical Decision task: is this a word?
DYME - longer to reject
 DYTE - shorter time to reject


What are some criticisms of this?
Looks only at “no” responses
 Perceived familiarity may affect results

Van Orden’s task

FLOWER
TULIP
 ROWS
 ROBS



Task: is the second word an exemplar of
the category?
Say “yes” or “now” and then read word
Task advantages




Sound similiarity should affect “yes”
responses (as well as “no” resposnes)
Based on a semantic judgment, not just
perceived stimulus familiarity
Task allows the use of word foils (as
opposed to nonword foils)
Allows comparison of sound-alike words
(ROWS) with spell-alike words (ROBS)
Experimental manipulations

Examplar vs. sound-alike vs. spell-alike
foils (TULIP vs. ROWS vs. ROBS)


Phonological mediation predicts more errors
for ROWS than ROBS
Degree of orthographic similarity of foils
MEET for MEAT (similar spelling)
 ROWS for ROSE (less similar spelling)
 Dual-route model predicts effects or
orthographic similarity separate from sound
similarity, predicts difference)

Experiment 1

Homophone vs. spelling control


ROWS vs. ROBS vs. ROSE
Degree of orthographic similarity of
homophone
MEET
 ROWS


Results?
Exp. 1 Results

More false positives for homophone foils
than spelling controls

More false positives to similarly spelled
homosphones than less similarly spelled
homophones

Supports all dual-access theories, but
doesn’t distinguish between different
models
Experiment 2

Are phonological effects “early” or “late”?

Method: use pattern masking, which limits
processing to early effects

Prediction of Interactive Activation model:
phonological effects won’t be disrupted by
pattern masking, but orthographic effects
will
Time course of processing





Issue of general interest in processing
Which processes are “early” or “late”?
Which precede which?
Are there techniques to tap only the early
processes?
Emphasis on early processes as most
important
Word Superiority Effect


Reicher, 1969, Wheeler, 1970
Which letter did you see in the word
presented?
D
K
********
WORD
********
********
********
FASTEST
WORD
D
ORWD
D
K
********
********
********
********
Experiment 2

Same as Exp. 1, but with pattern masking
at 150-SOA or less

Results?

Homophony results replicated
No difference on basis of spelling similarity

What does this mean?

Phonological effects are “early”

There’s some “orthographically
determined process” that is affected by
pattern masking. (I.e., the spelling effect
disappeared).
Can we conclude that dualroute models are it?


In the introduction they say that the dual-route
models predict that there will be more false
positives for those words that are more similar
(in sound and spelling) to the target word. The
results of Experiment 1 showed a difference
between similarly spelled foils and less similar
spelled foils, yet the discussion of experiment
2 says this is not evidence of the dual-route
model. How is this? (Jessica DeSisto)
Answer: not EXCLUSIVE evidence
Exp. 3 - Bypass vs.
Verification

Verirfication model:
Stage 1: Lexical access by phonological
similarity
 Stage 2: Orthographic verification


Bypass model: experienced readers
bypass phonology for orthography -predicts little/no phonological mediation for
frequent words
Exp. 3




Verification model: Predicts effect of
frequency of ROSE (category exemplar)
Bypass model: Predicts effect of
frequency of ROWS (stimulus)
Manipulate frequency of each
Results: Frequency effects only for
category exemplar, not stimulus
Conclusions of Exp. 3


Do not support Coltheart’s dual process
theory, which involves the bypass
hypothesis
Support the verification model
Overall results

Exp. 1: supports both phonological
mediation and orthographic effects


Consistent with Coltheart’s dual-process model
and Interactive Activation model
Exp. 2: pattern masking eliminates
orthogrpahic but not phonological effects
Inconsistent with Coltheart’s dual-process model
 Consistent with Interactive Activation and
verification models


Exp. 3: Verification and not Bypass hyp.
supported