effet du nombre des graphèmes en Anglais - Aix Marseille Université

194BibliographieMewhort, D. J. K., & Beal, A. L. (1977). Mechanism of word identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 629-640.Mewhort, D. J. K., Braun, J. G., & Heathcote, A. (1992). Response time distributions and the stroop task :A test of the Cohen, Dunbar, and McClelland (1990) model. Journal of Experimental Psychology :Human Perception and Performance, 18, 872-882.Meyer, D. E., Osman, A. M., Irwin, D. E., & Yantis, S. (1988). Modern mental chronometry. BiologicalPsychology, 26, 3-67.Meyer, D. E., Schvaneveldt, R. W., & Ruddy, M. G. (1974). Functions of graphemic and phonemic codes invisual word recognition. Memory and Cognition, 2, 309-321.Millis, M. L. (1986). Syllables and spelling units affect feature integration in words. Memory and Cognition,14, 409-419.Millis, M. L., & Button, S. B. (1989). The effect of polysemy on lexical decision time : Now you see it,now you don’t. Memory and Cognition, 17, 141-147.Monsell, S. (1991). The nature and locus of word frequency effects in reading. In D. Besner and G. W. Humphreys(Eds.), Basic Processes in Reading : Visual Word Recognition (pp. 148-197). Hillsdale NJ :Erlbaum.Monsell, S., Doyle, M., C., & Haggard, P., N. (1989). Effects of frequency on visual word recognition tasks: where are they ? Journal of Experimental Psycholology : General, 118, 43-71.Montant, M. (1998). Les étapes de traitement pré-lexical dans la reconnaissance visuelle des mots : Approchecomportementale et neuropsychologique. Thèse de Doctorat de l’Université de Provence.Montant, M., Nazir, T., & Poncet, M. (1998). Pure alexia and the viewing position effect in printed words.Cognitive Psychology, 15, 93-140.Morton, J., & Patterson, K. E. (1980). A new attempt at an interpretation, or, an attempt at a new interpretation.In M. Coltheart, K.E. Patterson, & J.C. Marshall (Eds.), Deep dyslexia. London : Routledge &Kegan Paul.Mozer, M. C. (1987). Early parallel processing in reading : A connectionist approach. In M. Coltheart (Ed.),Attention and Performance : Vol 12. The psychology of reading(pp. 83-104). Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum.Murrel, G. A., & Morton, J. (1974). Word recognition and morphemic structure. Journal of ExperimentalPsychology, 102, 963-968.Naish, P. (1980). The effects of graphemic and phonemic similarity between targets and masks in a backwardvisual masking paradigm. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 57-68.Nazir, T. A. (1993). On the relation between the optimal and the preferred viewing position in words duringreading. In : G. d'Ydewalle & J. van Rensbergen (eds.), Perception & Cognition : Advances in eyemovement research, (pp. 349 - 361). Amsterdam : North-Holland.Nazir, T. A., Heller, D., & Suβmann, C. (1992). Letter visibility and word recognition : The optimal viewingposition in printed words. Perception and Psychophysics, 52, 315-328.Nazir T. A., Jacobs A. M., & O'Regan J. K. (1998). Letter legibility and visual word recognition. Memoryand Cognition.Neely, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition : A selective review of current findingsand theories. In D. Besner & G. W. Humphreys (Eds.), Basic processes in reading : Visual wordrecognition (pp. 264-336). Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum.Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. New York : Appleton-Century-Crofts.Nietzsche, F. (1883). Ainsi parlait Zarathoustra. Traduction et édition au format de poche (1983) : LibrairieGénérale Française.Norris, D. (1994). A quantitative multiple-levels model of reading aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 6, 1212-1232.