Memory & Cognition

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 466–476 | Cite as

Compound word effects differ in reading, on-line naming, and delayed naming tasks

  • Albrecht Werner Inhoff
  • Deborah Briihl
  • Jill Schwartz
Article

Abstract

Bimorphemic compound words (e.g.,blueberry), bimorphemic suffixed words (e.g.,ceaseless), and monomorphemic controls (e.g.,arthritis) were read in neutral sentence contexts in Experiment 1. The main result revealed longer first fixation durations on compound words than on control and suffixed words. Different effects emerged when naming tasks were used. An on-line naming task revealed substantially shorter naming latencies for compound words than for control and suffixed words. Naming latencies for compound and control words were equivalent in a delayed naming task. These results indicate that on-line naming latencies and word-viewing durations may yield diverging results. They also suggest that activation of constituent words of compound words occurs independently from the specification of conventional word meanings.

References

  1. Andrews, S. (1986). Morphological influences on lexical access: Lexical or nonlexical effects.Journal of Memory & Language,25, 726–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balota, D. A., &Chumbley, J. I. (1984). Are lexical decisions a good measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 340–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balota, D. A., &Chumbley, J. I. (1985). The locus of word-frequency effects in the pronunciation task: Lexical access and/or production frequency?Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,24, 89–106.Google Scholar
  4. Baluch, B., &Besner, D. (1991). Visual word recognition: Evidence for strategic control of lexical and nonlexical routines in oral reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 644–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beauvillain, P. C. C., &Segui, J. (1989). On the presentation and processing of prefixed and suffixed derived words: A differential frequency effect.Journal of Memory & Language,28, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bergman, M. W., Hudson, P. T. W., &Eling, P. A. T. M. (1988). How simple complex words can be: Morphological processing and word representations.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,40A, 41–72.Google Scholar
  7. Carr, T., &Pollatsek, A. (1985). Recognizing printed words: A look at current models. In D. Besner, T. G. Waller, & G. E. MacKinnon (Eds.),Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (Vol. 5, pp. 2–73). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  8. Connine, C., Titone, D., &Wang, J. (1993). Auditory word recognition: Extrinsic and intrinsic effects of word frequency.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,19, 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Coslett, H. B., &Saffran, E. M. (1989). Evidence for preserved reading in pure alexia.Brain,112, 327–359.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading activation theory of retrieval in sentence production.Psychological Review,93, 283–321.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Feldman, L. B. (1994). Beyond orthography and phonology: Differences between inflections and derivations.Journal of Memory & Language,33, 442–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Feldman, L. B., &Bentin, S. (1994). Morphological analysis of disrupted morphemes: Evidence from Hebrew.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,47A, 407–435.Google Scholar
  13. Fowler, C. A., Napps, S. E., &Feldman, L. (1985). Relations among regular and irregular morphologically related words in the lexicon as revealed by repetition priming.Memory & Cognition,13, 241–255.Google Scholar
  14. Gielen, I., Brysbaert, M., &Dhondt, A. (1991). The syllable-length effect in number processing is task-dependent.Perception & Psychophysics,50, 449–458.Google Scholar
  15. Inhoff, A. W. (1984). Two stages of word processing during eye fixations in the reading of prose.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,23, 612–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Inhoff, A. W. (1987). Parafoveal word perception during eye fixations in reading: Effects of visual salience and word structure. In M. Coltheart (Ed.),Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 403–420). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  17. Inhoff, A. W. (1989a). Lexical access during eye fixations in reading: Are word access codes used to integrate lexical information across interword fixations?Journal of Memory & Language,28, 444–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Inhoff, A. W. (1989b). Parafoveal processing of words and saccade computation during eye fixations in reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,15, 544–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Inhoff, A. W., &Rayner, K. (1986). Parafoveal word processing during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word frequency.Perception & Psychophysics,40, 431–439.Google Scholar
  20. Inhoff, A. W., &Topolski, R. (1994a). Seeing morphemes: Loss of visibility during the retinal stabilization of compound and pseudocompound words.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 840–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Inhoff, A. W., &Topolski, R. (1994b). Use of phonological codes during eye fixations in reading and in on-line and delayed naming tasks.Journal of Memory & Language,33, 689–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Inhoff, A. W., &Tousman, S. (1990). Lexical priming from partial word previews.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,16, 825–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jared, D., &Seidenberg, M. (1990). Naming multisyllabic words.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 92–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Joordens, S., &Besner, D. (1992). Priming effects that span an intervening unrelated word: Implications for models of memory representation and retrieval.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 483–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Just, M., &Carpenter, P. A. (1990). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension.Psychological Review,87, 329–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kučera, H., &Francis, W. N. (1967).Computational analysis of presentday American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Lima, S. D., &Inhoff, A. W. (1985). Lexical access during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word-initial letter sequence.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,11, 272–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lima, S. D., &Pollatsek, A. (1983). Lexical access via an orthographic code? The Basic Orthographic Syllabic Structure (BOSS) reconsidered.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,22, 310–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lorch, R. F., &Myers, J. L. (1990). Regression analyses of repeated measures data in cognitive research.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,16, 149–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McConkie, G. W., Kerr, P. W., Redix, M. D., &Zola, D. (1988). Eye movement control during reading: I. The location of the initial fixation in words.Vision Research,28, 1107–1118.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. McRae, K., Jared, D., &Seidenberg, M. (1990). On the role of frequency and lexical access in word naming.Journal of Memory & Language,29, 43–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Monsell, S., Doyle, M. C., &Haggard, P. N. (1989). Effects of frequency on visual word recognition tasks: Where are they?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,118, 43–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Monsell, S., Patterson, K. E., Graham, A., Hughes, C. H., &Milroy, R. (1992). Lexical and sublexical translation of spelling to sound: Strategic anticipation of lexical status.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 452–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. O’Regan, J. K. (1990). Eye movements and reading. In E. Kowler (Ed.),Eye movements and their role in visual and cognitive processes: Reviews of oculomotor research (pp. 395–454). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  35. Paap, K. R., &Noel, R. W. (1991). Dual route models of print to sound: Still a good horse race.Psychological Research,53, 13–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pollatsek, A., Lesch, M., Morris, R., &Rayner, K. (1992). Phonological codes are used in integrating information across saccades in word identification and reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 148–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Prinzmetal, W. (1990). Neon colors illuminate reading units.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 584–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Prinzmetal, W., Hoffman, H., &Vest, K. (1991). Automatic processes in word perception: An analysis from illusory conjunction.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 902–923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rapp, B. C. (1992). The nature of sublexical orthographic organization: The bigram trough hypothesis examined.Journal of Memory & Language,31, 33–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rayner, K. (1979). Eye guidance in reading: Fixation location within words.Perception,8, 21–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Rayner, K., &Duffy, S. A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity.Memory & Cognition,14, 191–201.Google Scholar
  42. Rayner, K., &Pollatsek, A. (1987). Eye movements in reading: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Ed.),Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 327–363). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  43. Rayner, K., &Pollatsek, A. (1989).The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  44. Sandra, D. (1990). On the representation and processing of compound words: Automatic access to constituent morphemes does not occur.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,42A, 529–567.Google Scholar
  45. Seidenberg, M. S. (1987). Sublexical structure in visual word recognition: Access units or orthographic redundancy? In M. Coltheart (Ed.),Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 245–264). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  46. Seidenberg, M. S., Waters, G. S., Sanders, M., &Langer, P. (1984). Pre- and postlexical loci of contextual effects on word recognition.Memory & Cognition,12, 315–328.Google Scholar
  47. Solso, R. L., &Juel, C. L. (1980). Positional frequency and versatility of bigrams for two- through nine-letter English words.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation,12, 297–343.Google Scholar
  48. Taft, M. (1985). The decoding of words in lexical access: A review of the morphographic approach. In D. Besner, T. G. Waller, & G. E. MacKinnon (Eds.),Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (Vol. 5, pp. 83–124). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  49. Taft, M., &Forster, K. I. (1976). Lexical storage and retrieval of polymorphemic and polysyllabic words.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,15, 607–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tousman, S., &Inhoff, A. W. (1992). Phonology in multisyllabic word recognition.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research,21, 525–544.Google Scholar
  51. Vitu, F., O’Regan, J. K., Inhoff, A. W., &Topolski, R. (1995). Mindless reading: Eye-movement characteristics are similar in scanning letter strings and reading texts.Perception & Psychophysics,57, 352–364.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Albrecht Werner Inhoff
    • 1
  • Deborah Briihl
    • 1
  • Jill Schwartz
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyState University of New York at BinghamtonBinghamton

Personalised recommendations