Literature DB >> 29532285

"To Name or Not to Name: That is the Question": The Role of Response Inhibition in Reading.

Jacqueline Cummine1, Daniel Aalto2,3, Amberley Ostevik2, Kulpreet Cheema2, William Hodgetts2,3.   

Abstract

Reading is a complex process that includes the integration of information about letters (graphemes) and sounds (phonemes). In many circumstances, such as noisy environments, response inhibition is an additional factor that plays a marked role in successful oral reading. Response inhibition can take the form of task relevant inhibition (i.e., foils in a go/no-go task) and task irrelevant inhibition (i.e., distractor information). Here we investigated task relevant inhibition by having participants (N = 30) take part in two tasks: go/no-go naming with nonwords foils (GNG-NW) and go/no-go naming with pseudohomophones foils (GNG-PH). Also, we investigated the addition of task irrelevant inhibition by having participants (N = 28) take part in two tasks: GNG-NW + information masking and GNG-PH + information masking. We provide evidence that during a task relevant inhibition task, sub-word sound level information can be successfully inhibited, as evidenced by comparable response times for regular words and exception words, provided the foils do not contain familiar sound-based information (GNG-NW). In contrast, regular words were read aloud faster than exception words in a GNG-PH task, indicating that sub-word level interference occurs when the foils contain familiar sound-based information. The addition of task irrelevant inhibition (i.e., information masking at the phoneme level), served to increase response time overall, but did not impact the pattern of response times between regular words and exception words. Together these findings provide useful information regarding the role of response inhibition in word recognition and may be useful in computational models of word recognition and future work may benefit from accounting for the effects outlined in this paper.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Reading; Regularity effect; Response inhibition; Spelling-to-sound

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29532285     DOI: 10.1007/s10936-018-9572-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res        ISSN: 0090-6905


  17 in total

1.  Effects of word frequency and spelling-to-sound regularity in naming with and without preceding lexical decision.

Authors:  Y Hino; S J Lupker
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.332

2.  Computing the meanings of words in reading: cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes.

Authors:  Michael W Harm; Mark S Seidenberg
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  Reading aloud is not automatic: processing capacity is required to generate a phonological code from print.

Authors:  Michael Reynolds; Derek Besner
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Basic processes in reading: a critical review of pseudohomophone effects in reading aloud and a new computational account.

Authors:  Michael Reynolds; Derek Besner
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2005-08

5.  When underadditivity of factor effects in the Psychological Refractory Period paradigm implies a bottleneck: evidence from psycholinguistics.

Authors:  Derek Besner; Mike Reynolds; Shannon O'Malley
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2009-04-11       Impact factor: 2.143

6.  Transferability of Training Benefits Differs across Neural Events: Evidence from ERPs.

Authors:  Kelly G Garner; Natasha Matthews; Roger W Remington; Paul E Dux
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  The influence of training on the attentional blink and psychological refractory period.

Authors:  K G Garner; M N Tombu; P E Dux
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  On the relationship between response selection and response inhibition: An individual differences approach.

Authors:  Angela D Bender; Hannah L Filmer; K G Garner; Claire K Naughtin; Paul E Dux
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 2.199

9.  Manipulating instructions strategically affects reliance on the ventral-lexical reading stream: converging evidence from neuroimaging and reaction time.

Authors:  Jacqueline Cummine; Layla Gould; Crystal Zhou; Stan Hrybouski; Zohaib Siddiqi; Brea Chouinard; Ron Borowsky
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  2012-05-24       Impact factor: 2.381

10.  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
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.