Advertisement

Journal of Psycholinguistic Research

, Volume 47, Issue 4, pp 817–831 | Cite as

Early Effect of Phonological Information in Korean Visual Word Recognition: An ERP Investigation with Transposed Letters

  • Youan Kwon
  • Changhwan Lee
  • Jini Tae
  • Yoonhyoung Lee
Article
  • 59 Downloads

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.

Keywords

Phonological information Transposed letter Korean ERP N250 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (Grant No. NRF-2014S1A2A2027754).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that we have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 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.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 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.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 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.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 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.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Lee, S. (1990). On the functional load of phonetic/phonological rules: A quantitative survey in modern Korean. Journal of Language Research, 26, 441–467.Google Scholar
  26. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Park, K. (1996). The role of phonology in Hangul word recognition. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 8(1), 25–44.Google Scholar
  31. Park, K. (2003). Recognition of the meaning of word and phonological code. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 15(1), 19–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-prime reference guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools Inc.Google Scholar
  41. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 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.Google Scholar
  44. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Youan Kwon
    • 1
  • Changhwan Lee
    • 2
  • Jini Tae
    • 3
  • Yoonhyoung Lee
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyCatholic University of DaeguGyeongsan-siKorea
  2. 2.Department of PsychologySogang UniversitySeoulKorea
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyYeungnam UniversityGyeongsan-siKorea

Personalised recommendations