Abstract
Leading models of visual word recognition assume that the process of word identification is driven by abstract, case-invariant units (e.g., table and TABLE activate the same abstract representation). But do these models need to be modified to meet nuances of orthography as in German, where the first letter of common nouns is capitalized (e.g., Buch [book] and Hund [dog], but blau [blue])? To examine the role of initial capitalization of German words in lexical access, we chose a semantic categorization task (“is the word an animal name?”). In Experiment 1, we compared German words in all-lowercase vs. initial capitalization (hund, buch, blau vs. Hund, Buch, Blau). Results showed faster responses for animal nouns with initial capitalization (Hund < hund) and faster responses for lowercase non-nouns (blau < Blau). Surprisingly, we found faster responses for lowercase non-animal nouns (buch < Buch). As the latter difference could derive from task demands (i.e., buch does not follow German orthographic rules and requires a “no” response), we replaced the all-lowercase format with an orthographically legal all-uppercase format in Experiment 2. Results showed an advantage for all nouns with initial capitalization (Hund < HUND and Buch < BUCH). These findings clearly show that initial capitalization in German words constitutes an essential part of the words’ representations and is used during lexical access. Thus, models of visual word recognition, primarily focused on English orthography, should be expanded to the idiosyncrasies of other Latin-based orthographies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
In Danish and Norwegian, the capitalization of common nouns was suppressed because it was considered unnecessary—this decision was also politically motivated to separate these languages from German (see Bandle et al., 2005).
We matched the animal names and the non-animal common nouns in terms of length and bigram frequency. However, this was not possible for word frequency (most animal nouns are of medium/low frequency).
We thank an anonymous reviewer for suggesting this explanation.
References
Bandle, O., Braunmüller, K., Jahr, E. H., Karker, A., Naumann, H. P., & Teleman, U. (2005). The Nordic languages: An international handbook of the history of the North Germanic Languages (Vol. 2). Walter de Gruyter.
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
Bock, M. (1986). Cognitive aspects of upper and lower case for initial letters in German. In G. Augst (Ed.), New trends in graphemics and orthography (pp. 287–299). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110867329.287
Bock, M. (1989). Lesen in Abhängigkeit von der Groß- und Kleinschreibung. [Reading depending on capital and small letters]. Sprache und Kognition, 8(3), 133–151.
Bock, M., Hagenscheider, K., & Schweer, A. (1989). Zur Funktion der Groß-und Kleinschreibung beim Lesen deutscher, englischer und niederländischer Texte [The function of capital and small letters during reading of German, English, and Dutch texts]. In P. Eisenberg, H. Günther (Eds.), Schriftsystem und Orthographie (pp. 23–55). Niemeyer.
Brysbaert, M., Buchmeier, M., Conrad, M., Jacobs, A. M., Bölte, J., & Böhl, A. (2011). The word frequency effect. Experimental Psychology, 58(5), 412–424. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000123
Brysbaert, M., Speybroeck, S., & Vanderelst, D. (2009). Is there room for the BBC in the mental lexicon? On the recognition of acronyms. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(9), 1832–1842. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210802585471
Bürkner, P.-C. (2017). brms: an R Package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of Statistical Software, 80(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v080.i01
Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. C. (2001). DRC: A dual-route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204–256.
Davis, C. J. (2010). The spatial coding model of visual word identification. Psychological Review, 117, 713–758. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019738
Dehaene, S., Cohen, L., Sigman, M., & Vinckier, F. (2005). The neural code for written words: A proposal. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(7), 335–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.05.004
Dehaene, S., Naccache, L., Cohen, L., Bihan, D. L., Mangin, J.-F., Poline, J.-B., & Rivière, D. (2001). Cerebral mechanisms of word masking and unconscious repetition priming. Nature Neuroscience, 4(7), 752–758. https://doi.org/10.1038/89551
Dufau, S., Grainger, J., & Ziegler, J. C. (2012). How to say “no” to a nonword: A leaky competing accumulator model of lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(4), 1117–1128. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026948
Forster, K. I., & Shen, D. (1996). No enemies in the neighborhood: absence of inhibitory neighborhood effects in lexical decision and semantic categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(3), 696–713. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.22.3.696
Frost, R. (2012). Towards a universal model of reading. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35(5), 263–279. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X11001841
Goldinger, S. D. (1998). Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychological Review, 105, 252–279. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.105.2.251
Gontijo, P. F. D., Rayman, J., Zhang, S., & Zaidel, E. (2002). How brand names are special: Brands, words, and hemispheres. Brain and Language, 82(3), 327–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0093-934x(02)00036-6
Gontijo, P. F. G., & Zhang, S. (2007). The mental representation of brand names: Are brand names a class by themselves? In T. M. Lowrey (Ed.), Psycholinguistic phenomena in marketing communications (pp. 23–37). Erlbaum.
Grainger, J. (2018). Orthographic processing: A“mid-level” vision of reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 335–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2017.1314515
Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review, 103(3), 518–565. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.103.3.518
Grainger, J., Rey, A., & Dufau, S. (2008). Letter perception: From pixels to pandemonium. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 381–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.06.006
Gutierrez-Sigut, E., Vergara-Martínez, M., & Perea, M. (2019). Deaf readers benefit from lexical feedback during orthographic processing. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 12321–12321. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-48702-3
Henderson, L., & Chard, J. (1976). On the nature of the facilitation of visual comparisons by lexical membership. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 7(5), 432–434. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03337238
Hohenstein, S., & Kliegl, R. (2013). Eye movements reveal interplay between noun capitalization and word class during reading. In Proceedings of the cognitive science society (Vol. 35). http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/3dr387w1
Jacobs, A. M., Grainger, J., & Ferrand, L. (1995). The incremental priming technique: A method for determining within-condition priming effects. Perception & Psychophysics, 57(8), 1101–1110. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03208367
Jacobs, A. M., Nuerk, H. C., Graf, R., Braun, M., & Nazir, T. A. (2008). The initial capitalization superiority effect in German: Evidence for a perceptual frequency variant of the orthographic cue hypothesis of visual word recognition. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 72(6), 657–665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-008-0168-0
Kinoshita, S., Whiting, D., & Norris, D. (2021). What masked priming effects with abbreviations can tell us about abstract letter identities. Journal of Memory and Language. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2020.104209
Lu, C., Li, H., Fu, R., Qu, J., Yue, Q., & Mei, L. (2021). Neural representation in Visual Word Form Area during word reading. Neuroscience, 452, 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2020.10.040
Martin, N., & Davis, C. J. (2019). Evidence from masked-priming that initial identification of brand names is via abstract letter identities. British Journal of Psychology, 110(4), 745–768. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12362
McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88(5), 375–407. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.88.5.375
Müsseler, J., Nißlein, M., & Koriat, A. (2005). German capitalization of nouns and the detection of letters in continuous text. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(3), 143–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087470
Oganian, Y., Conrad, M., Aryani, A., Heekeren, H. R., & Spalek, K. (2016). Interplay of bigram frequency and orthographic neighborhood statistics in language membership decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(3), 578–596. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728915000292
Pauly, D. N., & Nottbusch, G. (2020). The influence of the German capitalization rules on reading. Frontiers in Communication. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2020.00015
Peirce, J. W., & MacAskill, M. R. (2018). Building experiments in PsychoPy. Sage.
Perea, M., Fernández-López, M., & Marcet, A. (2020). Does case-mixing disrupt the access to lexico-semantic information? Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 84(4), 981–989. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1111-7
Perea, M., Jiménez, M., & Gomez, P. (2015a). Do young readers have fast access to abstract lexical representations? Evidence from masked priming. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 129, 140–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2014.09.005
Perea, M., Jiménez, M., Talero, F., & López-Cañada, S. (2015b). Letter-case information and the identification of brand names. British Journal of Psychology, 106(1), 162–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12071
Perea, M., Marcet, A., & Vergara-Martinez, M. (2018). Are you taking the fastest route to the restaurant? The role of the usual letter-case configuration of words in lexical decision. Experimental Psychology, 65(2), 98–104. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000391
Peressotti, F., Cubelli, R., & Job, R. (2003). On recognizing proper names: The orthographic cue hypothesis. Cognitive Psychology, 47(1), 87–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0285(03)00004-5
Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2007). Nested incremental modeling in the development of computational theories: The CDP model of reading aloud. Psychological Review, 114(2), 273–315.
Rumelhart, D. E., & Siple, P. (1974). Process of recognizing tachistoscopically presented words. Psychological Review, 81(2), 99–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0036117
Sulpizio, S., & Job, R. (2018). Early and multiple-loci divergency of proper and common names: An event-related potential investigation. Neuropsychologia, 119, 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.07.034
Vergara-Martínez, M., Gómez, P., Jiménez, M., & Perea, M. (2015). Lexical enhancement during prime–target integration: ERP evidence from matched-case identity priming. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 15(2), 492–504. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-014-0330-7
Vergara-Martínez, M., Perea, M., & Leone-Fernandez, B. (2020). The time course of the lowercase advantage in visual word recognition: An ERP investigation. Neuropsychologia. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107556
Wimmer, H., Ludersdorfer, P., Richlan, F., & Kronbichler, M. (2016). Visual experience shapes orthographic representations in the visual word form area. Psychological Science, 27(9), 1240–1248. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616657319
Funding
The research reported in this article has been partially supported by Grant PSI2017-86210-P (Manuel Perea) from the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation, and Universities.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
The procedures involving human participants in this study were approved by the Experimental Research Ethics Committee of the Universitat de València and they were in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants provided written informed consent before starting the experimental session.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Appendix
Appendix
List of words that were used in Experiments 1 and 2. In Experiment 1, each word was presented with initial capitalization or in all lowercase letters and in Experiment 2, each word was presented with initial capitalization or in all uppercase letters.
Non-animal nouns: Antwort; Ärger; Arzt; Aufgabe; Auge; Beispiel; Bett; Bewegung; Blut; Boden; Buch; Büro; Eltern; Erde; Fehler; Fenster; Feuer; Firma; Fleisch (Anfang in Experiment 2); Flugzeug; Frage; Freunde; Freundin; Frieden; Gebäude; Gefahr; Gefühl; Geist; Geschäft; Geschenk; Gesicht; Glück; Grund; Hals; Haut; Herz; Himmel; Hochzeit; Hölle; Idee; Insel; Jahr; Kaffee; Kampf; König; Kraft; Krieg; Laden; Licht; Liebling; Liste; Luft; Meinung; Meister; Menge; Mensch (Zeichen in Experiment 2); Monat; Mund; Musik; Nummer; Onkel; Ort; Polizei; Richtung; Rolle; Ruhe; Schatz; Schiff; Schluss; Schritt; Schuld; Schule; Schwert; Seite; Sekunde; Sinn; Spaß; Spiel; Stimme; Straße; Stück; Stunde; Szene; Tasche; Teil; Tisch; Tochter; Traum; Versuch; Waffe; Wagen; Wahl; Wahrheit; Wasser; Witz; Woche; Wohnung; Wort; Zeug; Zimmer.
Non-nouns: absolut; alleine; alte; ändern; anrufen; bekannt; bekommen; bereit; bezahlen; böse; direkt; drehen; dumm; dürfen; echt; egal; ehrlich; erinnern; erklären; erledigt; ewig; falsch; fangen; fertig; fest; folgen; frei; froh; früh; führen; gehören; gelassen; groß; hart; heiraten; heiß; hoch; holen; hübsch; jung; kalt; kämpfen; kaputt; kaufen; kaum; kennen; klein; komisch; krank; kümmern; kurz; lang; langsam; laut; legen; lernen; lesen; lieb; lügen; lustig; mögen; möglich; müde; nennen; nervös; nett; nötig; offen; öffnen; perfekt; rechts; reich; rufen; ruhig; sauber; sauer; schlimm; schwer; spät; ständig; stark; stehen; süß; tief; töten; tragen; traurig; treffen; trinken; übel; verletzt; verrückt; wach; weit; wichtig; witzig; wohnen; wütend; zerstört; ziehen.
Animal nouns: Adler; Affe; Ameise; Auster; Biber; Biene; Büffel; Delfin; Drache; Eidechse; Einhorn; Elch; Elefant; Elster; Ente; Esel; Eule; Falke; Ferkel; Fink; Fisch; Flamingo; Frosch; Fuchs; Gans; Gazelle; Geier; Giraffe; Gorilla; Hamster; Hase; Hengst; Hering; Hirsch; Huhn; Hummel; Hummer; Hund; Kalb; Kamel; Känguru; Karpfen; Kater; Katze; Krabbe; Krähe; Krokodil; Kröte; Kuckuck; Küken; Lachs; Lama; Lamm; Laus; Leopard; Löwe; Luchs; Maultier; Maulwurf; Maus; Motte; Möwe; Mücke; Muschel; Nashorn; Nilpferd; Ochse; Otter; Panda; Panther; Papagei; Pavian; Pfau; Pferd; Pinguin; Pony; Pudel; Rabe; Ratte; Reh; Rentier; Schaf; Schnecke; Schwalbe; Schwan; Schwein; Skorpion; Spatz; Stute; Tiger; Vogel; Walross; Waschbär; Welpe; Wespe; Widder; Wolf; Wurm; Zebra; Ziege.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Labusch, M., Kotz, S.A. & Perea, M. The impact of capitalized German words on lexical access. Psychological Research 86, 891–902 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01540-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01540-3