An Adaptive Resonance Theory account of the implicit learning of orthographic word forms

An Adaptive Resonance Theory (ART) network was trained to identify unique orthographic word forms. Each word input to the model was represented as an unordered set of ordered letter pairs (open bigrams) that implement a flexible prelexical orthographic code. The network learned to map this prelexical orthographic code onto unique word representations (orthographic word forms). The network was trained on a realistic corpus of reading textbooks used in French primary schools. The amount of training was strictly identical to children's exposure to reading material from grade 1 to grade 5. Network performance was examined at each grade level. Adjustment of the learning and vigilance parameters of the network allowed us to reproduce the developmental growth of word identification performance seen in children. The network exhibited a word frequency effect and was found to be sensitive to the order of presentation of word inputs, particularly with low frequency words. These words were better learned with a randomized presentation order compared with the order of presentation in the school books. These results open up interesting perspectives for the application of ART networks in the study of the dynamics of learning to read.

[1]  Johannes C. Ziegler,et al.  A developmental perspective on the neural code for written words , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[2]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Computing the meanings of words in reading: cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. , 2004, Psychological review.

[3]  S. Grossberg,et al.  Neural dynamics of variable-rate speech categorization. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  Jason Weston,et al.  Curriculum learning , 2009, ICML '09.

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

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

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

[8]  Victoria A. Fromkin,et al.  Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey: The mental lexicon , 1988 .

[9]  Michael McCloskey,et al.  Catastrophic Interference in Connectionist Networks: The Sequential Learning Problem , 1989 .

[10]  H. Rubenstein,et al.  Homographic entries in the internal lexicon , 1970 .

[11]  Usha Goswami,et al.  Becoming literate in different languages: similar problems, different solutions. , 2006, Developmental science.

[12]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Parallel distributed processing: explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol. 1: foundations , 1986 .

[13]  D. Norman Learning and Memory , 1982 .

[14]  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.

[15]  Jonathan Grainger,et al.  Letter visibility and the viewing position effect in visual word recognition , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  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.

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

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

[19]  Hervé Glotin,et al.  A developmental perspective on visual word recognition: New evidence and a self-organising model , 2010 .

[20]  Stephen Grossberg,et al.  A massively parallel architecture for a self-organizing neural pattern recognition machine , 1988, Comput. Vis. Graph. Image Process..

[21]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Phonology, reading acquisition, and dyslexia: insights from connectionist models. , 1999, Psychological review.

[22]  S. Grossberg,et al.  Neural Dynamics of Category Learning and Recognition: Attention, Memory Consolidation, and Amnesia , 1987 .

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

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

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

[26]  Colin J. Davis,et al.  The self-organising lexical acquisition and recognition (SOLAR) model of visual word recognition. , 2001 .

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

[28]  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.

[29]  Marco Zorzi,et al.  Do current connectionist learning models account for reading development in different languages? , 2004, Cognition.

[30]  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.

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

[32]  C. A. Weaver,et al.  Psychology of Reading , 2012 .

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

[34]  D. Share Phonological recoding and self-teaching: sine qua non of reading acquisition , 1995, Cognition.

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

[36]  E. Kandel,et al.  Genes, nerve cells, and the remembrance of things past. , 1989, The Journal of neuropsychiatry and clinical neurosciences.

[37]  J. Grainger,et al.  Letter perception: from pixels to pandemonium , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[38]  J. Grainger,et al.  Letter position coding in printed word perception: Effects of repeated and transposed letters , 2004 .