Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the role of phonological information on visual word recognition by using letter transposition effects. The Korean writing system gives a unique opportunity to investigate such phenomenon since the transposition of the beginning consonant (onset) and the end consonant (coda) of a certain syllable allows one to keep the coda phonology constant while changing the written alphabetic characters. In this study, 23 participants’ ERPs to such transposition cases were compared with the ERPs to cases that do not maintain coda phonology while the participants were performing a go/no-go lexical decision task for visually presented letter strings. The results of the current study showed that transposed materials with original phonological information produce less N250 than both the baseline condition and the transposed materials with different phonological information condition. The results suggest that phonological information is used early in the lexical process in Korean and early orthographic processing is influenced by the characteristics of the grapheme to phoneme conversion process.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The Sejong corpus was created by the Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism in the Republic of Korea in 1998. This corpus comprises of approximately 1.5 billion u-juls, which is the basic unit of phrase in Korean (http://www.sejong.or.kr).
References
Acha, J., & Perea, M. (2008). The effect of neighborhood frequency in reading: Evidence with transposed-letter neighbors. Cognition, 108, 290–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.02.006.
Álvarez, C. J., Carreiras, M., & Perea, M. (2004). Are syllables phonological units in visual word recognition? Language and Cognitive Processes, 19(3), 427–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/769813935.
Barber, H. A., Otten, L. J., Kousta, S.-T., & Vigliocco, G. (2013). Concreteness in word processing: ERP and behavioral effects in a lexical decision task. Brain and Language, 125(1), 47–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2013.01.005.
Barber, H., Vergara, M., & Carreiras, M. (2004). Syllable-frequency effects in visual word recognition: Evidence from ERPs. NeuroReport, 15(3), 545–548. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.wnr.0000111325.38420.80.
Bentin, S., Mouchetant-Rostaing, Y., Giard, M. H., Echallier, J. F., & Pernier, J. (1999). ERP manifestations of processing printed words at different psycholinguistic levels: Time course and scalp distribution. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 11(3), 235–260.
Carreiras, M., Armstrong, B. C., Perea, M., & Frost, R. (2014). The what, when, where, and how of visual word recognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(2), 90–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2013.11.005.
Carreiras, M., Perea, M., Vergara, M., & Pollatsek, A. (2009). The time course of orthography and phonology: ERP correlates of masked priming effects in Spanish. Psychophysiology, 46(5), 1113–1122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00844.x.
Carreiras, M., Vergara, M., & Barber, H. (2005). Early event-related potential effects of syllabic processing during visual word recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(11), 1803–1817. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892905774589217.
Carreiras, M., Vergara, M., & Perea, M. (2009). ERP correlates of transposed-letter priming effects: The role of vowels versus consonants. Psychophysiology, 46, 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2008.00725.x.
Coch, D., & Mitra, P. (2010). Word and pseudoword superiority effects reflected in the ERP waveform. Brain Research, 1329, 159–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2010.02.084.
Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134(1), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009.
Ferrand, L., & Grainger, J. (2003). Homophone interference effects in visual word recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 56(3), 403–419. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980244000422.
Frankish, C., & Turner, E. (2007). SIHGT and SUNOD: The role of orthography and phonology in the perception of transposed letter anagrams. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 189–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.11.002.
Frost, R. (1998). Toward a strong phonological theory of visual word recognition: True issues and false trails. Psychological Bulletin, 123(1), 71–99. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.123.1.71.
Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2009). Watching the word go by: On the time-course of component processes in visual word recognition. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3(1), 128–156. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00121.x.
Grainger, J., Kiyonaga, K., & Holcomb, P. J. (2006). The time course of orthographic and phonological code activation. Psychological Science, 17, 1021–1026. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01821.
Grainger, J., & Whitney, C. (2004). Does the huamn mnid raed wrods as a wlohe? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 58–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2003.11.006.
Greenhouse, S. W., & Geisser, S. (1959). On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika, 24(2), 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289823.
Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J. (2006). On the time course of visual word recognition: An event-related potential investigation using masked repetition priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 1631–1643. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2006.18.10.1631.
Holcomb, P. J., Grainger, T., & O’Rourke, T. (2002). An electrophysiological study of the effects of orthographic neighborhood size on printed word perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 938–950. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892902760191153.
Hutzler, F., & Wimmer, H. (2004). Eye movements of dyslexic children when reading in a regular orthography. Brain and Language, 89(1), 235–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00401-2.
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 621–647. https://doi.org/10.1146/abburev.psych.093008.131123.
Kwon, Y., Lee, Y., & Nam, K. (2011). The different P200 effects of phonological and orthographic syllable frequency in visual word recognition in Korean. Neuroscience Letters, 501(2), 117–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2011.06.060.
Kwon, Y., Nam, K., & Lee, Y. (2012). ERP index of the morphological family size effect during word recognition. Neuropsychologia, 50(14), 3385–3391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.09.041.
Lee, S. (1990). On the functional load of phonetic/phonological rules: A quantitative survey in modern Korean. Journal of Language Research, 26, 441–467.
Lee, C. H., & Taft, M. (2009). Are onsets and codas important in processing letter position? A comparison of TL effects in English and Korean. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 530–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.01.002.
Lee, C. H., & Taft, M. (2011). Subsyllabic structure reflected in letter confusability effects in Korean word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 129–134. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-010-0028-y.
Lukatela, G., Frost, T., & Turvey, M. (1998). Phonological priming by masked nonword prime in the lexical decision task. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 666–683. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1998.2599.
Lukatela, G., & Turvey, M. T. (1994). Visual lexical access is initially phonological: Evidence from phonological priming homophones, and pseudohomophones. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 331–353. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.123.4.331.
Park, K. (1996). The role of phonology in Hangul word recognition. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 8(1), 25–44.
Park, K. (2003). Recognition of the meaning of word and phonological code. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 15(1), 19–37.
Pattamadilok, C., Perre, L., & Ziegler, J. C. (2011). Beyond rhyme or reason: ERPs reveal task-specific activation of orthography on spoken language. Brain and Language, 116(3), 116–124.
Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (2006). Do transposed-letter similarity effects occur at a prelexical phonological level? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1600–1613. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210500298880.
Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (2008). Do orthotactics and phonology constrain the transposed-letter effect? Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 69–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960701578146.
Perea, M., & Lupker, S. J. (2004). Can CANISO activate CASINO? Transposed-letter similarity effects with nonadjacent letter positions. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 231–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2004.05.005.
Perea, M., & Perez, E. (2009). Beyond alphabetic orthographies: The role of form and phonology in transposition effects in Katakana. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24, 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802053924.
Perea, M., Rosa, E., & Gomez, C. (2002). Is the go/no-go lexical decision task an alternative to the yes/no lexical decision task? Memory & Cognition, 30, 34–45. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195263.
Perre, L., & Ziegler, J. C. (2008). On-line activation of orthography in spoken word recognition. Brain Research, 1188, 132–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2007.10.084.
Rugg, M. D., & Curran, T. (2007). Event-related potentials and recognition memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 251–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.04.004.
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-prime reference guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools Inc.
Schoonbaert, S., & Grainger, J. (2004). Letter position coding in printed word perception: Effects of repeated and transposed letters. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 333–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960344000198.
Tae, J., Lee, C. H., & Lee, Y. (2015). The effect of the orthographic and phonological priming in Korean visual word recognition. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 26(1), 1–26.
Yi, G. (1993). On the role of frequency and internal structure in the processing of Kulga. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 5, 26–39.
Zagar, D. (2015). Hangul: A fascinating writing system. A comment on Kwon, Nam, and Lee (2015). Perceptual and Motor Skills, 121(2), 461–464. https://doi.org/10.2466/22.PMS.121c18x8.
Ziegler, J. C., Ferrand, L., Jacobs, A. M., Rey, A., & Grainger, J. (2000). Visual and phonological codes in letter and word recognition: Evidence from incremental priming. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A(3), 671–692. https://doi.org/10.1080/713755906.
Ziegler, J. C., Stone, G. O., & Jacobs, A. M. (1997). What is the pronunciation for-ough and the spelling for/u/? A database for computing feedforward and feedback consistency in English. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 29(4), 600–618. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210615.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (Grant No. NRF-2014S1A2A2027754).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that we have no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kwon, Y., Lee, C., Tae, J. et al. Early Effect of Phonological Information in Korean Visual Word Recognition: An ERP Investigation with Transposed Letters. J Psycholinguist Res 47, 817–831 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-018-9561-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-018-9561-z