effet du nombre des graphèmes en Anglais - Aix Marseille Université

Bibliographie 197Rey, A., Jacobs, A. M., Schmidt-Weigand, F., & Ziegler, J. C. (1998). A phoneme effect in visual wordrecognition. Cognition, 68, 41-50.Rey, A., Ziegler, J. C., & Jacobs, A. M. (soumis). Graphemes are perceptual reading units.Richards, L. G. (1976). Concreteness as a variable in word recognition. American Journal of Psychology, 89,707-718.Richardson, J. T. E. (1976). The effect of stimulus attributes upon latency of word recognition. British Journalof Psychology, 67, 315-325.Rice, G. A., & Robinson, D. O. (1975). The role of bigram frequency in perception of words and nonwords.Memory and Cognition, 3, 513-518.Rosson, M. B. (1985). The interaction of pronunciation rules and lexical representations in reading aloud.Memory & Cognition, 13, 90-99.Rubenstein, H., Garfield, L., & Millikan, J. (1970). Homographic entries in the internal lexicon. Journal ofVerbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 487-494.Rubenstein, H., Lewis, S. S., & Rubenstein, M. (1971). Homographic entries in the internal lexicon : Effectsof systematicity and relative frequency of meaning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,10, 645-657.Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J. L., & the P. D. P. Research Group (1986). Parallel and distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition, Vol. 1. Foundations. Cambridge (Mass.) :M.I.T. Press.Rumelhart, D. E., & Siple, P. (1974). The process of recognizing tachistoscopically presented words. PsychologicalReview, 81, 99-118.Saussure, F. de (1916). Cours de linguistique générale. Editions Payot, Paris.Schilling, H. E. H., Rayner, K., & Chumbley, J. I. (sous presse). Comparing naming, lexical decision, andeye fixation times : Word frequency effects and individual differences. Memory and Cognition.Schmauder, A. R. (1996). Ability to stand alone and processing of open-class and closed-class words : isolationversus context. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25, 443-481.Schneider, V. I., Healy, A. F., & Gesi, A. T. (1991).The role of phonetic processes in letter detection : Areevaluation. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 294-318.Sears, C. R., Hino, Y, & Lupker, S. J. (1995). Neighborhood size and neighborhood frequency effects inword recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance, 21, 876-900.Seidenberg, M. S. (1987). Sublexical structures in visual word recognition : Access units or orthographicredondancy ? In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and Performance XII : The psychology of reading.Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum.Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed developmental model of word recognition andnaming. Psychological Review, 96, 523-568.Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1990). More words but still no lexicon : Reply to Besner et al.(1990). Psychological Review, 97, 477-452.Seidenberg, M. S., Petersen, A., MacDonald, M. C., & Plaut, D. C. (1996). Pseudohomophone effects andmodels of word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology : Learning, Memory and Cognition,22, 48-62.Seidenberg, M, and Plaut, D. C. (1998). Evaluating word reading models at the item level : Matching thegrain of theory and data. Psychological Science. 9, 234-237.Seidenberg, M. S., & Waters, G. S. (1989). Word recognition and naming : A mega study [Abstract 30],Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 27, 48-62.