effet du nombre des graphèmes en Anglais - Aix Marseille Université

186BibliographieBrysbaert, M., Vitu, F., & Schroyens, W. (1996). The right visual field advantage and the optimal viewingposition effect : On the relation between foveal and parafoveal word recognition. Neuropsychology,10, 385-395.Butler, B., & Hains, S. (1979). Individual differences in word recognition latency. Memory & Cognition, 7,68-76.Carello, C., Turvey, M. T., & Lukatela, G. (1992). Can theories of word recognition remain stubbornlynonphonological? In R. Frost, & L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning(pp. 211-266). Amsterdam : North-Holland.Carr, T., Davidson, B. J., & Hawkins, H. L. (1978). Perceptual flexibility in word recognition : Strategiesaffect orthographic computation but not lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology : HumanPerception and Performance, 4, 674-690.Carr, T. H., & Pollatsek, A. (1985). Recognizing printed words : A look at current models. In D. Besner, T.G. Waller, & G. E. MacKinnon (Eds.), Reading research : Advances in theory and practice 5 (pp. 1-82). Orlando, FL : Academic Press.Carreiras, M., Alvarez, C. J., & De Vega, M. (1993). Syllable frequency and visual word recognition inSpanish. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 766-780.Carreiras, M., Perea, M., & Grainger, J. (1997). Effects of Orthographic neighborhood in visual word recognition: Cross-task comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology : Learning, Memory and Cognition23, 857-871.Carver, R. P. (1972). Speed readers don’t read ; They skim. Psychology Today, 6, 22-30.Cattel, J. M. (1886).The time taken up by cerebral operations. Mind, 11, 220-242.Clark, A., & Thornton, C. (1997). Trading spaces :Computation, representation, and the limits of uninformedlearning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 57-65.Clark, H. C. (1973). The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy : A critique of language statistics in psychologicalresearch. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 335-359.Clements, G. N. (1985). The geometry of phonological features. Phonology, 2, 225-252.Colé, P., Segui, J., & Taft, M. (1997). Words and morphemes as units for lexical access. Journal of Memoryand Language, 37, 312-330.Collyer, C. E. (1985). Comparing strong and weak models by fitting them to computer-generated data. Perceptionand Psychophysics, 38, 476-481.Coltheart, M. (1978). Lexical access in simple reading tasks. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Strategies of InformationProcessing. London : Academic Press.Coltheart, M., Curtis, B., Atkins, P., & Haller, M. (1993). Models of reading aloud : Dual-route and paralleldistributed-processingapproaches. Psychological Review, 100, 589-608.Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, J. T., & Besner, D. (1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornic(Ed.), Attention and Performance VI. London : Academic Press.Coltheart, V., & Leahy, J. (1992). Children's and adult's reading of nonwords : Effects of regularity and consistency.Journal of Experimental Psychology : Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 718-729.Coltheart, V., Patterson, K., & Leahy, J. (1994). When a ROWS is a ROSE : Phonological effects in writtenword comprehension. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47A, 917-955.Connine, C. M., Mullenix, J., Chernov, E., & Yelen, J. (1992). Word familiarity and frequency in visual andauditory word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology : Learning, Memory and Cognition,16, 1084-1096.Content, A. (1991). The effect of spelling-to-sound regularity on naming in French. Psychological Research,53, 3-12.