| Literature DB >> 29330681 |
Simon P Tiffin-Richards1, Sascha Schroeder2.
Abstract
In this study, we investigated the baseword frequency effect in children and its implications for models of visual word recognition. The baseword frequency effect reflects the finding that response latencies in the lexical decision task to nonwords derived from high-frequency basewords (e.g., GREAN derived from GREEN) are shorter than for those derived from low-frequency basewords (e.g., SLEAT derived from SLEET). Importantly, the baseword frequency effect presents a challenge to current activation-based models of visual word recognition. One explanation for this effect is that the orthographic representations of high-frequency basewords are easier to access. This allows a quick progression to a verification stage in which the exact spelling of a stimulus is checked, upon which the lexicality decision is then based. The main goal of this study was to investigate whether such a verification mechanism is specifically modulated by the quality of the orthographic lexicon. We tested whether the baseword frequency effect was evident in children's lexical decisions to pseudohomophones (PsH) and whether verification accuracy varied as a function of children's orthographic knowledge. The baseword frequency effect in response latency was observed in both German-speaking adults and children. Children's spelling skills significantly influenced the accuracy of the verification stage in their responses to PsH. These findings imply that verification is an integral part of word reading and thus should be included in computational models of visual word recognition.Entities:
Keywords: Cognitive development; Orthography; Phonology; Visual word recognition
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29330681 PMCID: PMC6267514 DOI: 10.3758/s13423-017-1424-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Psychon Bull Rev ISSN: 1069-9384
Observed mean response latency and accuracy to nonwords with high and low baseword frequency and high and low frequency words with standard errors for children and adults
| Frequency | Nonwords | Wordsa | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Latency | Accuracy | Latency | Accuracy | |
|
| ||||
| High | 2031 (27) | 0.53 (.008) | 1466 (17) | 0.92 (.004) |
| Low | 2145 (30) | 0.51 (.008) | 1750 (23) | 0.73 (.007) |
|
| ||||
| High | 733 (9) | 0.93 (.011) | 621 (8) | 0.99 (.003) |
| Low | 768 (11) | 0.90 (.013) | 702 (10) | 0.93 (.011) |
aThe observed mean response latencies and accuracies for words are included for comparison
Omnibus ANOVA results for the effects of baseword frequency and interactions with spelling skill on response accuracy and latency to nonwords
| Factor | Accuracy | Latency | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| χ2 |
|
|
| |||
| Intercept | <1 | 1 | 0.319 | 78588 | 1 | <0.001 |
| Spelling | 53 | 1 | <0.001 | 16 | 1 | 0.041 |
| Frequency | <1 | 1 | 0.339 | 4 | 1 | <0.001 |
| Frequency × spelling | 32 | 1 | <0.001 | 1 | 1 | 0.358 |
Fig. 1Baseword frequency effects in model means of response accuracy to nonwords for high- and low-skilled spellers