A model is described for the processing of word-like (regular) and nonword-like (irregular) letter strings in a situation where either type of string may occur. It is proposed that each type of string is processed by specialised routines which are deployed contingently on an initial decision about the regularity of an item. Three experiments involving word/nonword and same/different responses investigate how the processing of a string is affected by the brief exposure of a prior string. It is shown that processing is interfered with less when both strings are of the same degree of regularity than when they are not.
The model is revised and extended in the light of the results obtained as well as some theoretical considerations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdermanDSmithE E, 1971“Expectancy as a determinant of functional units in visual perception”, Cognitive Psychology2117–129
2.
BaronJThurstonI, 1973“An analysis of the word superiority effect”Cognitive Psychology4207–228
3.
BartlettF C, 1932Remembering (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
4.
BesnerDColtheartM, 1975“Same-different judgments with words and nonwords: The differential effects of relative size”Memory and Cognition3 (6) 673–677
BrunerJ SO'DowdD, 1958“A note on the informativeness of different parts of words”Language and Speech198–101
8.
ClarkH H, 1973“The language-as-fixed-effects fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research”Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour12335–359
9.
ColtheartM, 1972“Visual information processing” in New Horizons in Psychology 1972 Ed. DodwellP C, (London: Penguin Books)
10.
CrovitzH FSchiffmanH R, 1965“Visual field and the letter span”Journal of Experimental Psychology70218–223
11.
EgethH EBleckerD L, 1971“Differential effects of familiarity on judgements of sameness and difference”Perception and Psychophysics9 (4) 321–324
12.
EichelmanW H, 1970“Familiarity effects in the simultaneous matching task”Journal of Experimental Psychology86 (2) 275–282
13.
GarnerW R, 1962Uncertainty and Structure as Psychological Concepts (New York: John Wiley)
14.
GibsonE J, 1965“Learning to read”Science1481066–1072
15.
GibsonE J, 1971“Perceptual learning and the theory of word perception”Cognitive Psychology2351–368
16.
GibsonE JPickAOsserHHammondM, 1962“The role of grapheme-phoneme correspondences in the perception of words”American Journal of Psychology75554–570
17.
HaberR NKypriotakiL, 1974“Which language do Approximations to English approximate?”unpublished manuscript, University of Rochester, N.Y.
18.
HavensL LFooteW E, 1963“The structural features of competitive response”Perceptual and Motor Skills1975–80
19.
KruegerL E, 1970a“Search time in a redundant display”Journal of Experimental Psychology83 (3) 391–399
20.
KruegerL E, 1970b“Visual comparison in a redundant display”Cognitive Psychology1341–357
21.
MayznerM STresseltM E, 1965“Tables of single letter and digram frequencies for various word length and position combinations”Psychonomic Monograph Supplements1 (3) 33–78
22.
McClellandJJohnstonJ C, 1974Paper delivered at Eastern Psychological Association Meeting, April 8, Philadelphia, Pa
23.
MillerG ABrunerJ SPostmanL, 1954“The familiarity of letter sequences and tachistoscopic report”Journal of Genetic Psychology50129–139
24.
MichieD, 1973“Machines and the theory of intelligence”Nature241507–512
25.
MinskyMPapertS, 1972 Memo No.252, Artifical Intelligence Laboratory (Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press). Also in Project MAC Progress Report 8129–2241972 (Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press)
26.
NeisserU, 1967Cognitive Psychology (New York: Appleton Century Crofts)
27.
RubensteinHGarfieldLMilikanJ A, 1970“Homographic entries in the internal lexicon”Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour9487–494
28.
RubensteinHLewisS SRubensteinM A, 1971a“Homographic entries in the internal lexicon: Effects of systematicity and relative frequency of meanings”Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour1057–62
29.
RubensteinHSpaffordS LRubensteinM A, 1971b“Evidence for phonemic recoding in visual word recognition”Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour10645–657
30.
SmithE EHavilandS E, 1972“Why words are perceived more easily than nonwords: Inference vs unitisation”Journal of Experimental Psychology92 (1) 59–64
31.
SmithE ESpoehrK, 1974“The perception of printed English: A theoretical perspective” in Human Information Processing: Tutorials in Performance and Cognition Ed. KantowitzB H, (Potomac M.D.: Erlbaum Press)
32.
TurveyM T, 1974“Constructive theory, perceptual systems and tacit knowledge” in Cognition and the Symbolic Processes Eds WeimerW BPalermoD S, (New York: John Wiley)
33.
WheelerD D, 1970“Processes in word recognition”Cognitive Psychology159–85
