Is morphological priming stronger for transparent than opaque words? It depends on individual differences in spelling and vocabulary

被引:83
作者
Andrews, Sally [1 ]
Lo, Steson [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sydney, Sch Psychol, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
Morphological priming; Masked priming; Lexical retrieval; Reading skill; SKILL BOTTOM-UP; INTERACTIVE-ACTIVATION; LEXICAL QUALITY; MODEL; READERS; FORM; RECOGNITION; REPETITION; CONNECTIONIST; FREQUENCY;
D O I
10.1016/j.jml.2012.12.001
中图分类号
H0 [语言学];
学科分类号
030303 ; 0501 ; 050102 ;
摘要
This experiment used the masked priming lexical decision task to address previous contradictory evidence about the relative strength of priming for (i) transparent pairs (e.g., worker WORK) which are morphologically and semantically related; (ii) opaque pairs (e.g., corner CORN) which appear to be morphological relatives but are not semantically related; and (iii) form pairs (e.g., turnip TURN) that are only orthographically related. The average data for 92 university students showed stronger priming effects for transparent than opaque or form pairs, due to a constant 'headstart' for related relative to unrelated pairs across the RT distribution. However, these average effects were significantly modulated by individual differences in independent measures of spelling and vocabulary. A 'semantic profile', defined by relatively higher vocabulary than spelling, was associated with robust priming for transparent pairs, particularly for slower responses, but little priming for opaque or form pairs. In contrast, individuals with an 'orthographic profile' of relatively higher spelling than vocabulary showed sustained priming for opaque pairs that was at least as strong as for transparently related pairs. This evidence of systematic individual differences amongst skilled readers has important implications for theories of lexical representation and processing. Crown Copyright (C) 2012 Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:279 / 296
页数:18
相关论文
共 71 条
[2]  
Andrews S, 2006, FROM INKMARKS TO IDEAS: CURRENT ISSUES IN LEXICAL PROCESSING, P1
[3]   Distinguishing common and task-specific processes in word identification: A matter of some moment? [J].
Andrews, S ;
Heathcote, A .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 2001, 27 (02) :514-540
[4]  
Andrews S, 2012, CUR ISS PSYCHOL LANG, P151
[5]   Not All Skilled Readers Have Cracked the Code: Individual Differences in Masked Form Priming [J].
Andrews, Sally ;
Lo, Steson .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 2012, 38 (01) :152-163
[6]   Lexical Precision in Skilled Readers: Individual Differences in Masked Neighbor Priming [J].
Andrews, Sally ;
Hersch, Jolyn .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 2010, 139 (02) :299-318
[7]   Lexical expertise and reading skill: bottom-up and top-down processing of lexical ambiguity [J].
Andrews, Sally ;
Bond, Rachel .
READING AND WRITING, 2009, 22 (06) :687-711
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2007, The Oxford Handbook of Psycholinguistics, DOI DOI 10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780198568971.013.0016
[9]   Eye movements of highly skilled and average readers: Differential effects of frequency and predictability [J].
Ashby, J ;
Rayner, K ;
Clifton, C .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY SECTION A-HUMAN EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2005, 58 (06) :1065-1086
[10]   Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items [J].
Baayen, R. H. ;
Davidson, D. J. ;
Bates, D. M. .
JOURNAL OF MEMORY AND LANGUAGE, 2008, 59 (04) :390-412