Prelexical and Postlexical Strategies in Reading : Evidence from a Deep and a Shallow Orthography *

The validity of the orthographic depth hypothesis (ODH) was examined in Hebrew by employing pointed (shallow) and unpointed (deep) print. Experiments 1 and 2 revealed larger frequency effects, and larger semantic priming effects in naming, with unpointed print than with pointed print. In Experiments 3 and 4 subjects were presented with Hebrew consonantal strings that were followed by vowel marks appearing at stimulus onset asynchronies ranging from 0 ms (simultaneous presentation) to 300 ms from the onset of consonant presentation. Subjects were inclined to wait for the vowel marks to appear even though the words could be named uneqUIvocally using lexical phonology. These results suggest that prelexical phonology is the default strategy for readers in shallow orthographies, providing strong support for the ODH.

[1]  C. Perfetti,et al.  Reading in English and Chinese: Evidence for a "universal" phonological principle. , 1992 .

[2]  Chris Pratt,et al.  Orthographic and Phonological Processes in Reading , 2006 .

[3]  M T Turvey,et al.  Rapid naming is affected by association but not by syntax , 1988, Memory & cognition.

[4]  Word recognition in Serbo-Croatian is phonologically analytic. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[5]  Michael T. Turvey,et al.  Can theories of word recognition remain stubbornly nonphonological , 1992 .

[6]  Mark S. Seidenberg.  The time course of phonological code activation in two writing systems , 1985, Cognition.

[7]  Charles A. Perfetti,et al.  Automatic (prelexical) phonetic activation in silent word reading: Evidence from backward masking*1 , 1988 .

[8]  D. Balota,et al.  Are lexical decisions a good measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  S. Bentin,et al.  Processing phonological and semantic ambiguity: evidence from semantic priming at different SOAs. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[10]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Chapter 5 Beyond Orthographic Depth in Reading: Equitable Division of Labor , 1992 .

[11]  D. Besner,et al.  Visual Word Recognition: Evidence for Strategic Control of Lexical and Nonlexical Routines in Oral Reading , 1991 .

[12]  Michael T. Turvey,et al.  Context effects in bi-alphabetical word perception , 1989 .

[13]  G. C. Orden,et al.  Word identification in reading proceeds from spelling to sound to meaning. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[14]  M. C. Smith,et al.  Basic processes in reading : is the orthographic depth hypothesis sinking ? , 1992 .

[15]  Derek Besner,et al.  Orthographic and phonological codes in the oral reading of Japanese Kana. , 1987 .

[16]  J. H. Neely.  Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. , 1991 .

[17]  L. Katz,et al.  The reading process is different for different orthographies : the orthographic depth hypothesis , 1992 .

[18]  Evan F. Risko,et al.  Basic processes in reading: Is visual word recognition obligatory? , 2005, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[19]  Randolph G. Bias,et al.  Phonological recoding and reading. , 1981 .

[20]  Ram Frostt,et al.  Orthography and Phonology: The Psychological Reality of Orthographic Depth* , 2009 .

[21]  P. Tabossi,et al.  Semantic priming in the pronunciation of words in two writing systems: Italian and English , 1992, Memory & cognition.

[22]  Shlomo Bentin,et al.  Reading Consonants and Guessing Vowels: Visual Word Recognition in Hebrew Orthography* , 1992 .

[23]  Ignatius G. Mattingly,et al.  Chapter 1 Linguistic Awareness and Orthographic Form , 1992 .

[24]  Patrizia Tabossi,et al.  Chapter 16 Strategies and Stress Assignment: Evidence from a Shallow Orthography , 1992 .

[25]  Ragnhild Söderbergh.  Language by ear and by eye , 1975, Journal of Child Language.

[26]  R Frost,et al.  Processing lexical ambiguity and visual word recognition in a deep orthography , 1987, Memory & cognition.

[27]  John Defrancis.  Visible Speech: The Diverse Oneness of Writing Systems , 1991 .

[28]  L. Katz,et al.  Strategies for visual word recognition and orthographical depth: a multilingual comparison. , 1987 .

[29]  J. Hoffmann,et al.  The European Society for Cognitive Psychology , 1999 .

[30]  G. C. Orden.  A ROWS is a ROSE: Spelling, sound, and reading , 1987 .

[31]  S. Lupker.  Semantic Priming without Association: A Second Look. , 1984 .

[32]  N. Sebastián-Gallés.  Reading by analogy in a shallow orthography. , 1991 .

[33]  R Frost,et al.  Orthographic depth and the interaction of visual and auditory processing in word recognition , 1989, Memory & cognition.

[34]  M. Turvey,et al.  Automatic and pre-lexical computation of phonology in visual word identification , 1990 .

[35]  M T Turvey,et al.  Lexical decision in a phonologically shallow orthography , 1980, Memory & cognition.

[36]  Eckart Scheerer.  ORTHOGRAPHY AND LEXICAL ACCESS , 1986 .

[37]  H. Hawkins,et al.  Flexible coding in word recognition. , 1976, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[38]  L. Katz,et al.  Relation between pronunciation and recognition of printed words in deep and shallow orthographies. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[39]  R Frost,et al.  Phonetic recoding of phonologically ambiguous printed words. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[40]  L. Katz,et al.  Orthographic and phonemic coding for lexical access: evidence from Hebrew. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.