The use and nature of grapheme coding during sub-lexical processing and lexical access

This work aimed to investigate grapheme coding during sub-lexical processing and lexical access. Using the letter detection task in Experiment 1, we compared letter pairs that could be considered as a grapheme unit or not depending on context (referred to as weakly cohesive complex, e.g., an in chant vs cane) to real two-letter graphemes (highly cohesive complex, e.g., au in chaud) and single-letter graphemes (simple, e.g., a in place). Three experimental conditions were used, one of which was designed to prevent phonological influences. Data revealed that only highly cohesive complex graphemes were processed as units, not the weakly cohesive ones. The same pattern was found across experimental conditions in favor of an orthographic mechanism. In Experiments 2 and 3, a primed lexical decision task was used with two stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) and two different ranges of lexical frequency. We manipulated the number of graphemes removed from partial primes (d**che vs do**he-DOUCHE) and relatedness. In contrast to Experiment 1, no evidence was provided in favor of a role of graphemes during lexical access. We suggest that graphemes can be conceived as sub-lexical orthographic units per se but can only be captured within a sub-lexical route to reading.

[1]  Jonathan Grainger,et al.  Watching the Word Go by: On the Time-course of Component Processes in Visual Word Recognition , 2009, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[2]  Colin J Davis,et al.  The spatial coding model of visual word identification. , 2010, Psychological review.

[3]  Jonathan Grainger,et al.  Letter position information and printed word perception: the relative-position priming constraint. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  Colin J. Davis,et al.  An investigation of the role of grapheme units in word recognition. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[5]  A. Lecours,et al.  The Role of Sublexical Graphemic Processing in Reading , 2000, Brain and Language.

[6]  E. Marinus,et al.  Dyslexic and typical-reading children use vowel digraphs as perceptual units in reading , 2011, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[7]  Jonathan Grainger,et al.  Cracking the orthographic code: An introduction , 2008 .

[8]  Manuel Perea,et al.  The processing of consonants and vowels during letter identity and letter position assignment in visual-word recognition: An ERP study , 2011, Brain and Language.

[9]  Eva Marinus,et al.  The Use of Sublexical Clusters in Normal and Dyslexic Readers , 2008 .

[10]  Marco Zorzi,et al.  A Computational and Empirical Investigation of Graphemes in Reading , 2013, Cogn. Sci..

[11]  Marco Zorzi,et al.  Nested incremental modeling in the development of computational theories: the CDP+ model of reading aloud. , 2007, Psychological review.

[12]  Arnaud Rey,et al.  A phoneme effect in visual word recognition , 1998, Cognition.

[13]  R. Treiman,et al.  The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology What Can Megastudies Tell Us about the Orthographic Structure of English Words? , 2022 .

[14]  Ton Dijkstra,et al.  Shared neighborhood effects in masked orthographic priming , 2001, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[15]  M. Coltheart,et al.  Whammies and double whammies: The effect of length on nonword reading , 1998 .

[16]  Manuel Carreiras,et al.  Contrasting effects of token and type syllable frequency in lexical decision , 2008 .

[17]  Eva Marinus,et al.  Variability in the word-reading performance of dyslexic readers: Effects of letter length, phoneme length and digraph presence , 2010, Cortex.

[18]  Jonathan Grainger,et al.  A Dual-Route Approach to Orthographic Processing , 2011, Front. Psychology.

[19]  A. Rey,et al.  Syllable onsets are perceptual reading units , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[20]  Kevin Diependaele,et al.  Fast phonology and the Bimodal Interactive Activation Model , 2010 .

[21]  Manuel Perea,et al.  The overlap model: a model of letter position coding. , 2008, Psychological review.

[22]  Sonia Kandel,et al.  Graphemic cohesion effect in reading and writing complex graphemes , 2012 .

[23]  M. Carreiras,et al.  Do Transposed-Letter Similarity Effects Occur at a Prelexical Phonological Level? , 2006, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[24]  F. Chetail The internal structure of chaos: Letter category determines visual word perceptual units , 2012 .

[25]  Chris Westbury,et al.  The Probability of the Least Likely Non-Length-Controlled Bigram Affects Lexical Decision Reaction Times , 2002, Brain and Language.

[26]  Jonathan Grainger,et al.  Modeling letter position coding in printed word perception , 2004 .

[27]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. , 1981 .

[28]  J. Ziegler,et al.  CDP++.Italian: Modelling Sublexical and Supralexical Inconsistency in a Shallow Orthography , 2014, PloS one.

[29]  Manuel Perea,et al.  Transposed-letter effects: Consonants, vowels and letter frequency , 2008 .

[30]  S. Lupker,et al.  Can CANISO activate CASINO? Transposed-letter similarity effects with nonadjacent letter positions ☆ , 2004 .

[31]  James A. Reggia,et al.  Competitive Dynamics in a Dual-route Connectionist Model of Print-to-sound Transformation , 1988, Complex Syst..

[32]  Arnaud Rey,et al.  Graphemic complexity and multiple print-to-sound associations in visual word recognition , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[33]  M Coltheart,et al.  DRC: a dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. , 2001, Psychological review.

[34]  Boris New,et al.  Une base de données lexicales du français contemporain sur internet: LEXIQUE , 2001 .

[35]  J. Grainger,et al.  Phonology and Orthography in Visual Word Recognition: Evidence from Masked Non-Word Priming , 1992, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[36]  Jon Andoni Duñabeitia,et al.  The relative position priming effect depends on whether letters are vowels or consonants. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[37]  P. Bolger,et al.  Letter and grapheme perception in English and Dutch , 2009 .

[38]  Boris New,et al.  The time course of consonant and vowel processing during word recognition , 2014 .

[39]  Kristi A. Kiyonaga,et al.  The time course of orthographic and phonological code activation. , 1993, Psychological science.

[40]  Manuel Perea,et al.  Do orthotactics and phonology constrain the transposed-letter effect? , 2008 .

[41]  Jeffrey S Bowers,et al.  Contrasting five different theories of letter position coding: evidence from orthographic similarity effects. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[42]  Arnaud Rey,et al.  Graphemes are perceptual reading units , 2000, Cognition.

[43]  S. Muncer,et al.  Type and token bigram frequencies for two-through nine-letter words and the prediction of anagram difficulty , 2011, Behavior Research Methods.

[44]  S. Casalis,et al.  Grapheme coding in L2: How do L2 learners process new graphemes? , 2014 .

[45]  Marco Zorzi,et al.  Beyond single syllables: Large-scale modeling of reading aloud with the Connectionist Dual Process (CDP++) model , 2010, Cognitive Psychology.

[46]  Jonathan Grainger,et al.  A study of relative-position priming with superset primes. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[47]  E. Marinus,et al.  Two distinct parsing stages in nonword reading aloud: Evidence from Russian , 2017, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[48]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: part 1.: an account of basic findings , 1988 .

[49]  Jonathan Grainger,et al.  A Vision of Reading , 2016, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[50]  The role of phonology in a letter detection task , 2000, Memory & cognition.

[51]  Manuel Perea,et al.  ERP correlates of transposed-letter similarity effects: Are consonants processed differently from vowels? , 2007, Neuroscience Letters.

[52]  C. Whitney How the brain encodes the order of letters in a printed word: The SERIOL model and selective literature review , 2001, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[53]  R. Peereman,et al.  LEXOP: A lexical database providing orthography-phonology statistics for French monosyllabic words , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[54]  M. Sigman,et al.  Opinion TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences Vol.9 No.7 July 2005 The neural code for written words: a proposal , 2022 .

[55]  M. Brysbaert,et al.  Neighborhood-frequency effects when primes and targets are of different lengths , 2000, Psychological research.

[56]  Manuel Perea,et al.  Does letter position coding depend on consonant/vowel status? Evidence with the masked priming technique. , 2009, Acta psychologica.