Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T23:06:14.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Orthographic and phonological parafoveal processing of consonants, vowels, and tones when reading Thai

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

HEATHER WINSKEL
HEATHER WINSKEL*
Affiliation:
Southern Cross University
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Heather Winskel, Department of Psychology, School of Health and Human Sciences, Coffs Harbour Campus, Southern Cross University, Hogbin Drive, Coffs Harbour, NSW 2450, Australia. E-mail: heather.winskel@scu.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Four eye movement experiments investigated whether readers use parafoveal input to gain information about the phonological or orthographic forms of consonants, vowels, and tones in word recognition when reading Thai silently. Target words were presented in sentences preceded by parafoveal previews in which consonant, vowel, or tone information was manipulated. Previews of homophonous consonants (Experiment 1) and concordant vowels (Experiment 2) did not substantially facilitate processing of the target word, whereas the identical previews did. Hence, orthography appears to be playing the prominent role in early word recognition for consonants and vowels. Incorrect tone marker previews (Experiment 3) substantially retarded the subsequent processing of the target word, indicating that lexical tone plays an important role in early word recognition. Vowels in VOP (Experiment 4) did not facilitate processing, which points to vowel position being a significant factor. Primarily, orthographic codes of consonants and vowels (HOP) in conjunction with tone information are assembled from parafoveal input and used for early lexical access.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , October 2011 , pp. 739 - 759
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Acha, J., & Perea, M. (2008). The effect of neighborhood frequency in reading: Evidence with transposed-letter neighbors. Cognition, 108, 290–300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ashby, J., Treiman, R., Kessler, B., & Rayner, K. (2006). Vowel processing during silent reading: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 416–424.Google ScholarPubMed
Balota, D. A., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1985). The interaction of contextual constraints and parafoveal visual information in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 364–390.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berent, I., & Perfetti, C. A. (1995). A rose is a REEZ: The two-cycles model of phonological assembly in reading English. Psychological Review, 102, 146–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besner, D., Coltheart, M., & Davelaar, E. (1984). Basic processes in reading: Computation of abstract letter identities. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 38, 126–134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Binder, K. S., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1999). Extraction of information to the left of the fixated word in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1162–1172.Google Scholar
Brown, P., & Besner, D. (1987). The assembly of phonology in oral reading: A new model. In Coltheart, M. (Ed.), Attention and performance: The psychology of reading (Vol. 12, pp. 471–489). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Carr, T. H., & Pollatsek, A. (1985). Recognizing printed words: A look at current models. In Besner, D., Waller, T. J., & MacKinnon, G. E. (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (Chap. 5, pp. 1–82). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Carreiras, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., & Molinaro, N. (2009). Consonants and vowels contribute differently to visual word recognition: ERPs of relative position priming. Cerebral Cortex, 19, 2659–2670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carreiras, M., & Price, C. J. (2008). Brain activation for consonants and vowels. Cerebral Cortex, 18, 1727–1735.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carreiras, M., Vergara, M., & Perea, M. (2007). ERP correlates of transposed-letter similarity effects: Are consonants processed differently from vowels? Neuroscience Letters, 419, 219–224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carreiras, M., Vergara, M., & Perea, M. (2009). ERP correlates of transposed-letter priming effects: The role of vowels vs. consonants. Psychophysiology, 46, 34–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castles, A., Davis, C., & Forster, K. I. (2003). Word recognition development in children: Insights from masked-priming. In Kinoshita, S. & Lupker, S. (Eds.), Masked priming: State of the art (pp. 345–360). Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Chace, K. H., Rayner, K., & Well, A. D. (2005). Eye movements and phonological parafoveal preview: Effects of reading skill. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 209–217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Colombo, L. (2000). The assembly of phonology in Italian and English: Consonants and vowels. In Kennedy, A., Radach, R., Heller, D., & Pynte, J. (Eds.), Reading as a perceptual process (pp. 377–398). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204–256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, C. J. (1999). The self-organising lexical acquisition and recognition (SOLAR) model of visual word recognition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of New South Wales.Google Scholar
Davis, C. J. (2006). Orthographic input coding: A review of behavioural data and current models. In Andrews, S. (Ed.), From inkmarks to ideas: Current issues in lexical processing (pp. 180–206). Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Deutsch, A., Frost, R., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2005). Morphological parafoveal preview benefit effects in reading: Evidence from Hebrew. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 341–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, K. I., Davis, C., Schoknecht, C., & Carter, R. (1987). Masked priming with graphemically related forms: Repetition or partial activation? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39, 211–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frost, R. (1998). Toward a strong phonological theory of visual word recognition: True issues and false trails. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 71–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frost, R., Katz, L., & Bentin, S. (1987). Strategies for visual word recognition and orthographical depth: A multilingual comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 104–115.Google ScholarPubMed
Gomez, P., Ratcliff, R., & Perea, M. (2007). A model of the go/no-go task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 389–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review, 103, 518–565.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henderson, J. M., & Ferreira, F. (1990). Effects of foveal processing difficulty on the perceptual span in reading: Implications for attention and eye movement control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 417–429.Google ScholarPubMed
Inhoff, A. W., & Rayner, K. (1986). Parafoveal word processing during eye fixations in reading. Effects of word frequency. Perception and Psychophysics, 40, 431–439.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, R. L. (2007). The flexibility of letter coding: Nonadjacent letter transposition effects in the parafovea. In van Gompel, R., Fisher, M., Murray, W., & Hill, R. L. (Eds.), Eye movements: A window on mind and brain (pp. 425–440). Oxford: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, R. L., Perea, M., & Rayner, K. (2007). Transposed-letter effects in reading: Evidence from eye movements and parafoveal preview. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 209–229.Google ScholarPubMed
Kambe, G. (2004). Parafoveal processing of prefixed words during eye fixations in reading: Evidence against morphological influences on parafoveal preprocessing. Perception and Psychophysics, 66, 279–292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kessler, B., & Treiman, R. (2001). Relationships between sounds and letters in English monosyllables. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 592–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinoshita, S. (1998). The role of phonology in reading Japanese: Or why I don't hear myself when reading Japanese. Reading and Writing, 10, 439–455.Google Scholar
Lee, H. W., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2001). The relative contribution of consonants and vowels to word identification during silent reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 189–205.Google Scholar
Lee, H. W., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2002). The processing of vowels and consonants in reading: Evidence from the fast-priming paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 766–772.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, Y., Binder, K. S., Kim, J., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1999). Activation of phonological codes during eye fixations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 948–964.Google ScholarPubMed
Liu, L., Peng, D., Ding, G., Jin, Z., Zhang, L., Li, K., & Chen, C. (2006). Dissociation in the neural basis underlying Chinese tone and vowel production. NeuroImage, 29, 515–523.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, W., Inhoff, A. W., Ye, Y., & Wu, C. (2002). Use of parafoveally visible characters during the reading of Chinese sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 1213–1227.Google ScholarPubMed
Luksaneeyanawin, S. (2004). The Thai one million word database. Bangkok, Thailand: Chulaglongkorn University, Center for Research in Speech and Language Processing.Google Scholar
McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McConkie, G. W., & Rayner, K. (1975). The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading. Perception and Psychophysics, 17, 578–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miellet, S., & Sparrow, L. (2004). Phonological codes are assembled before word fixation: Evidence from boundary paradigm in sentence reading. Brain and Language, 90, 299–310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norris, D., & Kinoshita, S. (2008). Perception as evidence accumulation and Bayesian inference. Insights from masked priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 434–455.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perea, M., & Acha, J. (2009). Does letter position coding depend on consonant/vowel status? Evidence with the masked priming technique. Acta Psychologica, 130, 127–137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (2006). Do transposed-letter similarity effects occur at a prelexical phonological level? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1600–1613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perea, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., & Carreiras, M. (2008). Transposed-letter priming effects for close versus distant transpositions. Experimental Psychology, 55, 397–406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perea, M., & Lupker, S. J. (2004). Can CANISO activate CASINO? Transposed-letter similarity effects with nonadjacent letter positions. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 231–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perea, M., & Peretz, E. (2009). Beyond alphabetic orthographies: The role of form and phonology in transposition effects in Katakana. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24, 67–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perfetti, C. A., & McCutchen, D. (1982). Speech processes in reading. In Lass, N. (Ed.), Speech and language: Advances in basic research and practice (Vol. 7, pp. 237–269). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Pollatsek, A., Lesch, M. F., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1992). Phonological codes are used in integrating information across saccades in word identification and reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 148–162.Google ScholarPubMed
Pollatsek, A., Tan, L. H., & Rayner, K. (2000). The role of phonological codes in integrating information across saccadic eye movements in Chinese character identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 607–633.Google ScholarPubMed
Rayner, K. (1975). The perceptual span and peripheral cues in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 65–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372–422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rayner, K., Well, A. D., Pollatsek, A., & Bertera, J. H. (1982). The availability of useful information to the right of fixation in reading. Perception and Psychophysics, 31, 537–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayner, K., White, S., Johnson, R. L., & Liversedge, S. (2006). Reading words with jumbled letters: There's a cost. Psychological Science, 17, 192–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slattery, T. J., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2006). The time course of phonological and orthographic processing of acronyms in reading: Evidence from eye movements. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 412–417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tsai, J.-L., Lee, C.-Y., Tzeng, O. J. L., Hung, D. L., & Yen, N.-S. (2004). Use of phonological codes for Chinese characters: Evidence from processing of parafoveal preview when reading sentences. Brain and Language, 91, 235–244.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Velan, H., & Frost, R. (2009). Letter-transposition effects are not universal: The impact of transposing letters in Hebrew. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 285–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, S. J., Rayner, K., & Liversedge, S. P. (2005). Eye movements and the modulation of parafoveal processing by foveal processing difficulty: A re-examination. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12, 891–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitney, C. (2001). How the brain encodes the order of letters in a printed word: The SERIOL model and selective literature review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 8, 221–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitney, C. (in press). Comparison of the SERIOL and SOLAR theories of letter-position encoding. Brain and Language.Google Scholar
Williams, C. C., Perea, M., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2006). Previewing the neighborhood: The role of orthographic neighbors as parafoveal previews in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 1072–1082.Google Scholar
Winskel, H., Radach, R., & Luksaneeyanawin, S. (2009). Eye movements when reading spaced and unspaced Thai and English: A comparison of Thai-English bilinguals and English monolinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 339–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, Y., Pollatsek, A., & Potter, M. C. (1999). The activation of phonology during silent Chinese word reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 838–857.Google ScholarPubMed