Masked phonological priming effects in English - Center for Reading ...
Masked phonological priming effects in English - Center for Reading ...
Masked phonological priming effects in English - Center for Reading ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
K. Rastle, M. Brysbaert / Cognitive Psychology 53 (2006) 97–145 143Davis, C. J. (<strong>in</strong> press). Orthographic <strong>in</strong>put cod<strong>in</strong>g: A review of behavioural data and current models. InS. Andrews (Ed.), From <strong>in</strong>kmarks to ideas: Current issues <strong>in</strong> lexical process<strong>in</strong>g. Hove: Psychology Press.Davis, C. J., & Taft, M. (2005). More words <strong>in</strong> the neighbourhood: Interference <strong>in</strong> lexical decision due to deletionneighbors. Psychonomic Bullet<strong>in</strong> & Review, 12, 904–910.De Moor, W., & Brysbaert, M. (2000). Neighborhood frequency <strong>effects</strong> when primes and targets are of differentlengths. Psychological Research, 63, 159–162.Dehaene, S., Naccache, L., Le Clec’H, G., Koechl<strong>in</strong>, E., Mueller, M., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., et al. (1998).Imag<strong>in</strong>g unconscious semantic <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong>. Nature, 395, 597–600.Drieghe, D., & Brysbaert, M. (2002). Strategic <strong>effects</strong> <strong>in</strong> associative <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong> with words, homophones, andpseudohomophones. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learn<strong>in</strong>g, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 951–961.Ferrand, L., & Gra<strong>in</strong>ger, J. (1992). Phonology and orthography <strong>in</strong> visual word recognition: Evidence frommasked nonword <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong>. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45A, 353–372.Ferrand, L., & Gra<strong>in</strong>ger, J. (1996). List context <strong>effects</strong> on masked <strong>phonological</strong> <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>in</strong> the lexical decisiontask. Psychonomic Bullet<strong>in</strong> & Review, 3, 515–519.Forster, K. I. (2004). Category size <strong>effects</strong> revisited: Frequency and masked <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>effects</strong> <strong>in</strong> semanticcategorization. Bra<strong>in</strong> and Language, 90, 276–286.Forster, K. I., & Davis, C. (1991). The density constra<strong>in</strong>t on <strong>for</strong>m <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>in</strong> the nam<strong>in</strong>g task: Interference <strong>effects</strong>from a masked prime. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 1–25.Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A w<strong>in</strong>dows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behaviorresearch methods, <strong>in</strong>struments, and computers, 35, 116–124.Frost, R. (1998). Toward a strong <strong>phonological</strong> theory of visual word recognition: True issues and false trails.Psychological Bullet<strong>in</strong>, 123, 71–99.Frost, R., Ahissar, M., Gotesman, R., & Tayeb, S. (2003). Are <strong>phonological</strong> <strong>effects</strong> fragile? The effect oflum<strong>in</strong>ance and exposure duration on <strong>for</strong>m <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong> and <strong>phonological</strong> <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong>. Journal of Memory andLanguage, 48, 346–378.Gra<strong>in</strong>ger, J., & Ferrand, L. (1994). Phonology and orthography <strong>in</strong> visual word recognition: Effects of maskedhomophone primes. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 218–233.Gra<strong>in</strong>ger, J., & Jacobs, A. (1996). Orthographic process<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> visual word recognition: A multiple read-outmodel. Psychological Review, 103, 518–565.Gra<strong>in</strong>ger, J., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2003). Modell<strong>in</strong>g letter position cod<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> pr<strong>in</strong>ted word perception. InP. Bon<strong>in</strong> (Ed.), The mental lexicon. New York: Nova Science.Gronau, N., & Frost, R. (1997). Prelexical phonologic computation <strong>in</strong> a deep orthography: Evidence frombackward mask<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> Hebrew. Psychonomic Bullet<strong>in</strong> & Review, 4, 107–112.Harm, M. W., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Comput<strong>in</strong>g the mean<strong>in</strong>gs of words <strong>in</strong> read<strong>in</strong>g: Division of laborbetween visual and <strong>phonological</strong> processes. Psychological Review, 111, 662–720.Havelka, J., & Rastle, K. (2005). The assembly of phonology from pr<strong>in</strong>t is serial and subject to strategic control:Evidence from Serbian. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learn<strong>in</strong>g, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 148–158.Holyk, G. G., & Pexman, P. M. (2004). The elusive nature of early <strong>phonological</strong> <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>effects</strong>: Are there<strong>in</strong>dividual differences? Bra<strong>in</strong> and Language, 90, 353–367.Humphreys, G. W., Evett, L. J., & Taylor, D. E. (1982). Automatic <strong>phonological</strong> <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>in</strong> visual wordrecognition. Memory & Cognition, 10, 576–590.Kello, C. T., & Plaut, D. C. (2003). Strategic control over rate of process<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> word read<strong>in</strong>g: A computational<strong>in</strong>vestigation. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 207–232.K<strong>in</strong>oshita, S. (2003). The nature of masked onset <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>effects</strong> <strong>in</strong> nam<strong>in</strong>g: A review. In S. K<strong>in</strong>oshita &S. J. Lupker (Eds.), <strong>Masked</strong> <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong>: State of the art. New York: Psychology Press.Lee, A. Y., B<strong>in</strong>der, K. S., Kim, J. O., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1999a). Activation of <strong>phonological</strong> codes dur<strong>in</strong>geye fixations <strong>in</strong> read<strong>in</strong>g. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Per<strong>for</strong>mance, 25, 948–964.Lee, H. W., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1999b). The time course of <strong>phonological</strong>, semantic, and orthographiccod<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> read<strong>in</strong>g: Evidence from the fast-<strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong> technique. Psychonomic Bullet<strong>in</strong> & Review, 6, 624–634.Lukatela, G., Frost, S. J., & Turvey, M. T. (1998). Phonological <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong> by masked nonword primes <strong>in</strong> the lexicaldecision task. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 666–683.Lukatela, G., Frost, S. J., & Turvey, M. T. (1999). Identity <strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>English</strong> is compromised by <strong>phonological</strong>ambiguity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Per<strong>for</strong>mance, 25, 775–790.Lukatela, G., & Turvey, M. T. (1994a). Visual lexical access is <strong>in</strong>itially <strong>phonological</strong>: 1. Evidence from associative<strong>prim<strong>in</strong>g</strong> by words, homophones, and pseudohomophones. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123,107–128.