Literature DB >> 23398257

The flexibility of letter-position flexibility: evidence from eye movements in reading Hebrew.

Hadas Velan1, Avital Deutsch, Ram Frost.   

Abstract

Hebrew provides an intriguing contrast to European languages. On the one hand, like any European language, it has an alphabetic script. On the other hand, being a Semitic language, it differs in the structure of base words. By monitoring eye movements, we examined the time-course of processing letter transpositions in Hebrew and assessed their impact on reading different types of Hebrew words that differ in their internal structure. We found that letter transposition resulted in dramatic reading costs for words with Semitic word structure, and much smaller costs for non-Semitic words. Moreover, the strongest impact of transposition occurred where root-letter transposition resulted in a pseudo-root, where significant interference emerged already in first fixation duration. Our findings thus suggest that Hebrew readers differentiate between Semitic and non-Semitic forms already at first fixation, at the early phase of word recognition. Moreover, letters are differentially processed across the visual array, given their morphological structure and their contribution to recovering semantic meaning. We conclude that flexibility or rigidity in encoding letter position is determined by cues regarding the internal structure of printed words. 2013 APA, all rights reserved

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23398257      PMCID: PMC3967053          DOI: 10.1037/a0031075

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  31 in total

1.  Learning to find a shape.

Authors:  M Sigman; C D Gilbert
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 24.884

2.  Does jugde activate COURT? Transposed-letter similarity effects in masked associative priming.

Authors:  Manuel Perea; Stephen J Lupker
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2003-09

3.  Orthographic structure versus morphological structure: principles of lexical organization in a given language.

Authors:  Ram Frost; Tamar Kugler; Avital Deutsch; Kenneth I Forster
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 3.051

4.  Letter transpositions within and across morphemes.

Authors:  Kiel Christianson; Rebecca L Johnson; Keith Rayner
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Cambridge University versus Hebrew University: the impact of letter transposition on reading English and Hebrew.

Authors:  Hadas Velan; Ram Frost
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-10

6.  Developing a universal model of reading necessitates cracking the orthographic code.

Authors:  Colin J Davis
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2012-08-29       Impact factor: 12.579

7.  Towards a universal neurobiological architecture for learning to read.

Authors:  Marcin Szwed; Fabien Vinckier; Laurent Cohen; Stanislas Dehaene
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2012-08-29       Impact factor: 12.579

8.  Words with and without internal structure: what determines the nature of orthographic and morphological processing?

Authors:  Hadas Velan; Ram Frost
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2010-12-15

9.  Letter-transposition effects are not universal: The impact of transposing letters in Hebrew.

Authors:  Hadas Velan; Ram Frost
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2009-10-01       Impact factor: 3.059

10.  TRANSPOSED LETTER EFFECTS IN PREFIXED WORDS: IMPLICATIONS FOR MORPHOLOGICAL DECOMPOSITION.

Authors:  Kathleen M Masserang; Alexander Pollatsek
Journal:  J Cogn Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2012-06-08
View more
  10 in total

1.  The Separability of Morphological Processes from Semantic Meaning and Syntactic Class in Production of Single Words: Evidence from the Hebrew Root Morpheme.

Authors:  Avital Deutsch
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2016-02

2.  What can we learn from learning models about sensitivity to letter-order in visual word recognition?

Authors:  Itamar Lerner; Blair C Armstrong; Ram Frost
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2014-11-01       Impact factor: 3.059

3.  What predicts successful literacy acquisition in a second language?

Authors:  Ram Frost; Noam Siegelman; Alona Narkiss; Liron Afek
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2013-05-22

4.  Transposed letter priming effects and allographic variation in Arabic: Insights from lexical decision and the same-different task.

Authors:  Sami Boudelaa; Dennis Norris; Abdesattar Mahfoudhi; Sachiko Kinoshita
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Tracking second language immersion across time: Evidence from a bi-directional longitudinal cross-linguistic fMRI study.

Authors:  Henry Brice; Stephen J Frost; Atira Sara Bick; Peter J Molfese; Jay G Rueckl; Kenneth R Pugh; Ram Frost
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 3.139

6.  Eye movements during text reading align with the rate of speech production.

Authors:  Benjamin Gagl; Klara Gregorova; Julius Golch; Stefan Hawelka; Jona Sassenhagen; Alessandro Tavano; David Poeppel; Christian J Fiebach
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2021-12-06

7.  Effects of word predictability on eye movements during Arabic reading.

Authors:  Maryam A AlJassmi; Kayleigh L Warrington; Victoria A McGowan; Sarah J White; Kevin B Paterson
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-10-10       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Aging and the optimal viewing position effect in Chinese.

Authors:  Pingping Liu; Danlu Liu; Buxin Han; Kevin B Paterson
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-10-29

9.  From "cracking the orthographic code" to "playing with language": toward a usage-based foundation of the reading process.

Authors:  Sebastian Wallot
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-08-22

10.  Parafoveal processing of orthographic, morphological, and semantic information during reading Arabic: A boundary paradigm investigation.

Authors:  Ehab W Hermena; Eida J Juma; Maryam AlJassmi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-08-02       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.