Unpredictability and complexity of print-to-speech correspondences increase reliance on lexical processes: more evidence for the orthographic depth hypothesis

ABSTRACT The Orthographic Depth Hypothesis [Katz, L., & Frost, R. (1992). The reading process is different for different orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. In R. Frost & L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning (pp. 67–84). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science] proposes cross-linguistic differences in the involvement of lexical processing during reading. In orthographies with complex, inconsistent, and/or incomplete sublexical correspondences, decoding is more difficult and therefore slower. This gives more time to the lexical route to retrieve information, and leads to a greater ratio of lexical processing. We test whether this mechanism applies both for words with inconsistent (in English) and for words with complex (in French) correspondences. As complex correspondences are sufficient to derive a correct pronunciation, an increase in lexical processing may not occur. In a reading-aloud task, we used the frequency effect to measure lexical processing. The data showed stronger involvement of lexical processing for inconsistent compared to consistent words, and for complex compared to simple words. The results confirm that Katz and Frost’s proposed mechanism applies to different sources of orthographic depth.

[1]  Bernard Lété,et al.  MANULEX: A grade-level lexical database from French elementary school readers , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[2]  V. Mann,et al.  Phoneme awareness and pathways into literacy: A comparison of German and American children , 2002 .

[3]  Michael T. Turvey,et al.  The Serbo-Croatian Orthography Constrains the Reader to a Phonologically Analytic Strategy , 2017 .

[4]  Leif D. Nelson,et al.  False-Positive Psychology , 2011, Psychological science.

[5]  H. Wimmer,et al.  The impact of orthographic consistency on dyslexia: A German-English comparison , 1997, Cognition.

[6]  Willem J. M. Levelt,et al.  The preparation of syllables in speech production , 2004 .

[7]  D. Bates,et al.  Parsimonious Mixed Models , 2015, 1506.04967.

[8]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  The English Lexicon Project , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[9]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[10]  Kenneth I Forster,et al.  DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy , 2003, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[11]  Ram Frostt,et al.  Prelexical and Postlexical Strategies in Reading : Evidence from a Deep and a Shallow Orthography * , 2009 .

[12]  Michael J Cortese,et al.  Regularity effects in word naming: What are they? , 2000, Memory & cognition.

[13]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Lexique 2 : A new French lexical database , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

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

[15]  E. Wagenmakers,et al.  Hidden multiplicity in exploratory multiway ANOVA: Prevalence and remedies , 2014, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[16]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Age of Acquisition Effects in Word Reading and Other Tasks , 2002 .

[17]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Subtlex-UK: A New and Improved Word Frequency Database for British English , 2014, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

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

[19]  Gordon D. A. Brown,et al.  Contextual Diversity, Not Word Frequency, Determines Word-Naming and Lexical Decision Times , 2006, Psychological science.

[20]  Marcus Taft,et al.  Reading and the Mental Lexicon , 1991 .

[21]  S. Andrews.  Phonological recoding: Is the regularity effect consistent? , 1982 .

[22]  Conrad Perry,et al.  The DRC model of visual word recognition and reading aloud: An extension to German , 2000 .

[23]  M. Brysbaert,et al.  The use of film subtitles to estimate word frequencies , 2007, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[24]  Ram Frost,et al.  Towards a universal model of reading , 2012, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[25]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Semantic effects in single-word naming. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[26]  Dan Chateau,et al.  Spelling–sound consistency effects in disyllabic word naming , 2003 .

[27]  James L. McClelland,et al.  A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. , 1989, Psychological review.

[28]  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.

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

[30]  A. Jacobs,et al.  The word frequency effect: a review of recent developments and implications for the choice of frequency estimates in German. , 2011, Experimental psychology.

[31]  Xenia Schmalz,et al.  Quantifying the reliance on different sublexical correspondences in German and English , 2014 .

[32]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  Influence of consonantal context on the pronunciation of vowels: A comparison of human readers and computational models , 2003, Cognition.

[33]  Elisabeth Dévière,et al.  Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R , 2009 .

[34]  Bruce Bridgeman,et al.  Is the dual-route theory possible in phonetically regular languages? , 1987, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[35]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  The French Lexicon Project: Lexical decision data for 38,840 French words and 38,840 pseudowords , 2010, Behavior research methods.

[36]  D. Jared.  Spelling-Sound Consistency and Regularity Effects in Word Naming , 2002 .

[37]  Walter Daelemans,et al.  Measuring the Complexity of Writing Systems , 1994, J. Quant. Linguistics.

[38]  Serje Robidoux,et al.  Hierarchical clustering analysis of reading aloud data: a new technique for evaluating the performance of computational models , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[39]  Uta Frith,et al.  Differences in Phonological Recoding in German- and English-Speaking Children. , 1998 .

[40]  Eva Marinus,et al.  Density and length in the neighborhood: Explaining cross-linguistic differences in learning to read in English and Dutch. , 2015, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[41]  Xenia Schmalz,et al.  Getting to the bottom of orthographic depth , 2015, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

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

[43]  Sallyanne Palethorpe,et al.  Nonword reading: comparing dual-route cascaded and connectionist dual-process models with human data. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[45]  H. Wimmer,et al.  Learning to read: English in comparison to six more regular orthographies , 2003, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[46]  D. Balota,et al.  Moving beyond Coltheart’s N: A new measure of orthographic similarity , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[47]  Debra Jared,et al.  Spelling-Sound Consistency Affects the Naming of High-Frequency Words , 1997 .

[48]  Kristina Moll,et al.  Effects of orthographic consistency on eye movement behavior: German and English children and adults process the same words differently. , 2015, Journal of experimental child psychology.

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

[50]  R. Baayen,et al.  Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items , 2008 .

[51]  Willem J. M. Levelt,et al.  Effects of syllable preparation and syllable frequency in speech production: Further evidence for syllabic units at a post-lexical level , 2009 .

[52]  Laura M. Steacy,et al.  Modeling Polymorphemic Word Recognition , 2016, Journal of learning disabilities.

[53]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  The British Lexicon Project: Lexical decision data for 28,730 monosyllabic and disyllabic English words , 2011, Behavior Research Methods.

[54]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  The basis of consistency effects in word naming , 1990 .

[55]  Conrad Perry,et al.  Speed of lexical and nonlexical processing in French: The case of the regularity effect , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[56]  Athanassios Protopapas,et al.  Check Vocal: A program to facilitate checking the accuracy and response time of vocal responses from DMDX , 2007, Behavior research methods.

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

[58]  M. Brysbaert,et al.  Practice Effects in Large-Scale Visual Word Recognition Studies: A Lexical Decision Study on 14,000 Dutch Mono- and Disyllabic Words and Nonwords , 2010, Front. Psychology.

[59]  P. H. Seymour,et al.  Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies. , 2003, British journal of psychology.

[60]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Understanding normal and impaired word reading: computational principles in quasi-regular domains. , 1996, Psychological review.

[61]  L. Katz,et al.  Strategies for visual word recognition and orthographical depth: a multilingual comparison. , 1987, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[62]  R. Glushko.  The Organization and Activation of Orthographic Knowledge in Reading Aloud. , 1979 .

[63]  D. Barr,et al.  Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. , 2013, Journal of memory and language.

[64]  D. Balota,et al.  Visual word recognition of multisyllabic words , 2009 .

[65]  Sally Andrews,et al.  Rule and analogy mechanisms in reading nonwords: Hough dou peapel rede gnew wirds? , 1998 .

[66]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English , 2009, Behavior research methods.

[67]  D. Share.  On the Anglocentricities of current reading research and practice: the perils of overreliance on an "outlier" orthography. , 2008, Psychological bulletin.