Literature DB >> 22396127

Orthographic similarity: the case of "reversed anagrams".

Alison L Morris1, Mary L Still.   

Abstract

How orthographically similar are words such as paws and swap, flow and wolf, or live and evil? According to the letter position coding schemes used in models of visual word recognition, these reversed anagrams are considered to be less similar than words that share letters in the same absolute or relative positions (such as home and hose or plan and lane). Therefore, reversed anagrams should not produce the standard orthographic similarity effects found using substitution neighbors (e.g., home, hose). Simulations using the spatial coding model (Davis, Psychological Review 117, 713-758, 2010), for example, predict an inhibitory masked-priming effect for substitution neighbor word pairs but a null effect for reversed anagrams. Nevertheless, we obtained significant inhibitory priming using both stimulus types (Experiment 1). We also demonstrated that robust repetition blindness can be obtained for reversed anagrams (Experiment 2). Reversed anagrams therefore provide a new test for models of visual word recognition and orthographic similarity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22396127     DOI: 10.3758/s13421-012-0183-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  28 in total

Review 1.  How the brain encodes the order of letters in a printed word: the SERIOL model and selective literature review.

Authors:  C Whitney
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-06

2.  Shared neighborhood effects in masked orthographic priming.

Authors:  W J van Heuven; T Dijkstra; J Grainger; H Schriefers
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-03

3.  Masked inhibitory priming in english: evidence for lexical inhibition.

Authors:  Colin J Davis; Stephen J Lupker
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Re(de)fining the orthographic neighborhood: the role of addition and deletion neighbors in lexical decision and reading.

Authors:  Colin J Davis; Manuel Perea; Joana Acha
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Types and tokens in visual processing: a double dissociation between the attentional blink and repetition blindness.

Authors:  M M Chun
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Repetition blindness: type recognition without token individuation.

Authors:  N G Kanwisher
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1987-11

7.  Orthographic repetition blindness.

Authors:  C L Harris; A L Morris
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  2000-11

8.  Repetition blindness in rapid lists: activation and inhibition versus construction and attribution.

Authors:  Bruce W A Whittlesea; Michael E J Masson
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  The English Lexicon Project.

Authors:  David A Balota; Melvin J Yap; Michael J Cortese; Keith A Hutchison; Brett Kessler; Bjorn Loftis; James H Neely; Douglas L Nelson; Greg B Simpson; Rebecca Treiman
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2007-08

10.  Repetition blindness: the effects of stimulus modality and spatial displacement.

Authors:  N Kanwisher; M C Potter
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1989-03
View more
  2 in total

1.  Eyes wide open: Pupil size as a proxy for inhibition in the masked-priming paradigm.

Authors:  Jason Geller; Mary L Still; Alison L Morris
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-05

2.  Can rotated words be processed automatically? Evidence from rotated repetition priming.

Authors:  András Benyhe; Péter Csibri
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2021-03-15
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.