A multistream model of visual word recognition

Four experiments are reported that test a multistream model of visual word recognition, which associates letter-level and word-level processing channels with three known visual processing streams isolated in macaque monkeys: the magno-dominated (MD) stream, the interblob-dominated (ID) stream, and the blob-dominated (BD) stream (Van Essen & Anderson, 1995). We show that mixing the color of adjacent letters of words does not result in facilitation of response times or error rates when the spatial-frequency pattern of a whole word is familiar. However, facilitation does occur when the spatial-frequency pattern of a whole word is not familiar. This pattern of results is not due to different luminance levels across the different-colored stimuli and the background because isoluminant displays were used. Also, the mixed-case, mixed-hue facilitation occurred when different display distances were used (Experiments 2 and 3), so this suggests that image normalization can adjust independently of object size differences. Finally, we show that this effect persists in both spaced and unspaced conditions (Experiment 4)—suggesting that inappropriate letter grouping by hue cannot account for these results. These data support a model of visual word recognition in which lower spatial frequencies are processed first in the more rapid MD stream. The slower ID and BD streams may process some lower spatial frequency information in addition to processing higher spatial frequency information, but these channels tend to lose the processing race to recognition unless the letter string is unfamiliar to the MD stream—as with mixed-case presentation.

[1]  J. M. Cattell.  THE TIME TAKEN UP BY CEREBRAL OPERATIONS , 1886 .

[2]  A. Healy,et al.  Detection errors on the word the: evidence for reading units larger than letters. , 1976, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  M. Coltheart,et al.  Case alternation impairs word identification , 1974 .

[4]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Micro Experimental Laboratory: An integrated system for IBM PC compatibles , 1988 .

[5]  W. B. Pillsbury.  A study in apperception , 1897 .

[6]  T. R. Jordan,et al.  Position-specific masking and the word-letter phenomenon: Reexamining the evidence from the Reicher-Wheeler paradigm. , 1996 .

[7]  P. H. Schiller.  Parallel Pathways in the Visual System , 1993 .

[8]  P. Perona,et al.  Rapid natural scene categorization in the near absence of attention , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  M. Bar,et al.  Magnocellular Projections as the Trigger of Top-Down Facilitation in Recognition , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[10]  B. Skottun,et al.  The magnocellular deficit theory of dyslexia: the evidence from contrast sensitivity , 2000, Vision Research.

[11]  T. R. Jordan,et al.  Constructing isoluminant stimuli for word recognition research: A precautionary study , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[12]  Gordon E Legge,et al.  Psychophysics of reading XX. Linking letter recognition to reading speed in central and peripheral vision , 2001, Vision Research.

[13]  B Wallace,et al.  Influence of case type, word frequency, and exposure duration on visual word recognition. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  G. E. MacKinnon,et al.  Reading Research Advances in Theory and Practice , 1985 .

[15]  Marilyn Jager Adams,et al.  Models of word recognition , 1979, Cognitive Psychology.

[16]  Glyn W Humphreys,et al.  The PIG in sPrInG: Evidence on letter grouping from the reading of buried words , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[17]  G. Orban,et al.  Comparative mapping of higher visual areas in monkeys and humans , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[18]  Timothy R. Jordan,et al.  Presenting words without interior letters: Superiority over single letters and influence of postmask boundaries. , 1990 .

[19]  D. Raab.  Statistical facilitation of simple reaction times. , 1962, Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[20]  Jeremy W. Grabbe,et al.  Differential age effects for case and hue mixing in visual word recognition. , 2002, Psychology and aging.

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

[22]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Disruption to word or letter processing? The origins of case-mixing effects. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[23]  S. Petersen,et al.  Activation of extrastriate and frontal cortical areas by visual words and word-like stimuli. , 1990, Science.

[24]  David C. Van Essen,et al.  Information Processing Strategies and Pathways in the Primate Visual System . , 1995 .

[25]  B. Skottun.  Is dyslexia caused by a visual deficit? , 2001, Vision Research.

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

[27]  D. Raab.  DIVISION OF PSYCHOLOGY: STATISTICAL FACILITATION OF SIMPLE REACTION TIMES* , 1962 .

[28]  Timothy R. Jordan,et al.  Perceiving exterior letters of words: differential influences of letter-fragment and non-letter-fragment masks. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[29]  M. Zorzi,et al.  Two routes or one in reading aloud? A connectionist dual-process model. , 1998 .

[30]  Sharon M. Thomas,et al.  Assessing the importance of letter pairs in initial, exterior, and interior positions in reading. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[31]  J Grainger,et al.  Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: a multiple read-out model. , 1996, Psychological review.

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

[33]  David J. Madden,et al.  Adult Age Differences in Regional Cerebral Blood Flow during Visual Word Identification: Evidence from H2 15O PET , 1996, NeuroImage.

[34]  D J Madden,et al.  Evidence for a parallel input serial analysis model of word processing. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[35]  L O Harvey,et al.  Identification confusions among letters of the alphabet. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[36]  David A. Balota,et al.  The Utility of Item-Level Analyses in Model Evaluation: A Reply to Seidenberg and Plaut , 1998 .

[37]  D C Van Essen,et al.  Information processing in the primate visual system: an integrated systems perspective. , 1992, Science.

[38]  John H. R. Maunsell,et al.  How parallel are the primate visual pathways? , 1993, Annual review of neuroscience.

[39]  D. Madden,et al.  Word frequency effects at brief exposure durations: comment on Paap and Johansen (1994). , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[40]  Timothy R. Jordan,et al.  Word superiority over isolated letters: The neglected case of forward masking , 1994, Memory & cognition.

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

[42]  H. Kucera,et al.  Computational analysis of present-day American English , 1967 .

[43]  M. Bar.  Visual objects in context , 2004, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[44]  D. D. Wheeler.  Processes in word recognition , 1970 .

[45]  G. Legge,et al.  Psychophysics of reading—I. Normal vision , 1985, Vision Research.

[46]  P. Allen,et al.  Influence of Mild Cognitive Impairment on Visual Word Recognition , 2007, Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition.

[47]  J. A. Baro,et al.  A defective visual pathway in children with reading disability. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[48]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  The Effects of Case Mixing on Word Recognition: Evidence from a PET Study , 2001, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[49]  G. Sperling,et al.  Object spatial frequencies, retinal spatial frequencies, noise, and the efficiency of letter discrimination , 1991, Vision Research.

[50]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  CASE MIXING AND THE TASK-SENSITIVE DISRUPTION OF LEXICAL PROCESSING , 1996 .

[51]  David H. Peterzell,et al.  What covariance mechanisms underlie green/red equiluminance, luminance contrast sensitivity and chromatic (green/red) contrast sensitivity? , 2000, Vision Research.

[52]  T. R. Jordan,et al.  Assessing the role of different spatial frequencies in word perception by good and poor readers , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[53]  Phillip L. Emerson,et al.  Holism revisited: evidence for parallel independent word-level and letter-level processors during word recognition , 1991 .

[54]  G. Legge,et al.  The effect of contrast on reading speed in dyslexia , 2000, Vision Research.

[55]  Jeremy W. Grabbe,et al.  Evidence for an activation locus of the word-frequency effect in lexical decision. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[56]  JH Maunsell,et al.  Does primate motion perception depend on the magnocellular pathway? , 1991, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[57]  D J Madden,et al.  Influence of age and processing stage on visual word recognition. , 1993, Psychology and aging.

[58]  D. Balota,et al.  Factors influencing word naming in younger and older adults. , 2000, Psychology and aging.

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

[60]  G. M. Reicher.  Perceptual recognition as a function of meaninfulness of stimulus material. , 1969, Journal of experimental psychology.

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

[62]  E. DeYoe,et al.  Concurrent processing in the primate visual cortex. , 1995 .

[63]  David H. Peterzell,et al.  Spatial frequency tuned covariance channels for red–green and luminance-modulated gratings: psychophysical data from human infants , 2000, Vision Research.

[64]  DH Hubel,et al.  Psychophysical evidence for separate channels for the perception of form, color, movement, and depth , 1987, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[65]  D. H. Kelly.  Motion and vision. II. Stabilized spatio-temporal threshold surface. , 1979, Journal of the Optical Society of America.