Masked phonological priming effects in English - Center for Reading ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

134 K. Rastle, M. Brysbaert / Cognitive Psychology 53 (2006) 97–145A1.2Maximum Activation10.80.60.40.2WordsFoils01 9 17 25 33 41 49 57 65 73 81 89 97CycleB1.41.2Total Activation10.80.60.4WordsFoils0.201 9 17 25 33 41 49 57 65 73 81 89 97CycleFig. 3. Maximum phonological activation (A) and total phonological activation (B) for words and pseudohomophonefoils using the standard lexical decision parameters of the DRC model.can be made solely on the basis of phonological information; and doing so in the contextof a weak phonological architecture totally eliminates the need to propose an additionalspelling check.On the basis of these simulations, we submit that the recognition of printed words inlexical decision (and perhaps in other tasks too; e.g., perceptual identification) is basedlargely on the analysis of phonological representations, the activation of which is constrainedby orthographic information.8. ConclusionsThe research in this article began with two investigators sitting on opposite sides of thefence separating weak phonological and strong phonological theories of visual word recognition.One of us had argued on the basis of reading aloud data (e.g., Havelka & Rastle,2005; Rastle & Coltheart, 1999) that phonological assembly is a slow and serial process,but had not considered how such a process could be reconciled with masked phonologicalpriming effects (the empirical basis of which she questioned; Coltheart et al., 2001). Theother of us had argued on the basis of masked phonological priming data (e.g., Brysbaert,2001; Drieghe & Brysbaert, 2002) that phonological assembly is a rapid and automatic
K. Rastle, M. Brysbaert / Cognitive Psychology 53 (2006) 97–145 135process in word recognition, but had not considered how such a process could be reconciledwith reading aloud data. These divergent positions on the role of phonology in visualword recognition provide a good characterisation of the past 15 years of theoretical debatein this area. The empirical and computational investigations of masked phonologicalpriming presented in this article led us to a new position, supported by simulations froman implemented model, which integrates these opposing perspectives in a relatively successfulmanner.To end on a broader note, in considering the nature of debate in this area over the past15 years, we have been struck by the fact that researchers too easily think in terms of yes orno distinctions (e.g., is there as masked phonological priming effect or not?) and do notrealize how often they are making assumptions that are based on ‘common sense’ (e.g.,that it is not possible to distinguish words and pseudohomophones on the basis of phonologicalinformation). If our research has any very general implications to impart, it is thatthe two of us could not have come to an agreement about the role of phonology in visualword recognition if we had not conducted a quantitative review of the literature, carriedout new well-designed experiments, and evaluated our ideas in the context of a workingcomputational model.
Page 5 and 6: K. Rastle, M. Brysbaert / Cognitive
Page 7 and 8: Table 1Studies of English phonologi
Page 21 and 22: Phonological priming effects on RTs
Page 23 and 24: As in Experiment 1, we assessed pho
Page 25 and 26: simulation of masked priming. It is
Page 27 and 28: items yielded this pattern; and at
Page 31 and 32: Despite improvement in the analysis
Page 37: K. Rastle, M. Brysbaert / Cognitive
Page 41 and 42: flu phlue slaur DSD 727 669 0.15 0.
Page 43 and 44: nerve nurve narve SDS 563 547 0.10
Page 49: K. Rastle, M. Brysbaert / Cognitive

Masked phonological priming effects in English - Center for Reading ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?