Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 1, Issue 3, pp 345–356 | Cite as

The extraction of phrase structure during reading: Evidence from letter detection errors

  • Asher Koriat
  • Seth N. Greenberg
Article

Abstract

In light of recent suggestions regarding the prominence of structure in speech production and comprehension, it has been postulated that structural processing might also play a similarly important role in reading. Some evidence in support of this contention can be gleaned from eye-movement research. However, more systematic support comes from recent work on letter detection during reading, which has shown that the rate of omission errors is inordinately high for morphemes that disclose phrase structure. The results of three lines of research suggest that, early in text processing, readers attempt to extract a structural frame for the sentence to help the on-line integration of accessed representations, and that structure-supporting units recede to the background as the meaning of the sentence evolves.

References

  1. Aaronson, D., &Ferres, S. (1983). Lexical categories and reading tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,9, 675–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abramovici, S. (1983). Errors in proofreading: Evidence for syntactic control of letter processing?Memory & Cognition,11, 258–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andreewsky, E., Deloche, G., &Kossanyi, P. (1987). Analogies between speed-reading and deep dyslexia: Towards a procedural understanding of reading. In M. Coltheart, K. Patterson, & J. C. Marshall (Eds.),Deep dyslexia (pp. 307–325). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  4. Balota, D. A., Pollatsek, A., &Rayner, K. (1985). The interaction of contextual constraints and parafoveal visual information.Cognitive Psychology,17, 364–390.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Besner, D. (1989). On the role of outline shape and word-specific visual pattern in the identification of function words: NONE.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,41A, 91–105.Google Scholar
  6. Bock, K. (1990). Structure in language: Creating form in talk.American Psychologist,45, 1221–1236.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bock, K., &Cutting, C. (1992). Regulating mental energy: Performance units in language production.Journal of Memory & Language,31, 99–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bock, K., &Loebell, H. (1990). Framing sentences.Cognition,35, 1–39.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Carr, T. H., Brown, J. S., &Charalambous, A. (1989). Repetition and reading: Perceptual encoding mechanisms are very abstract but not very interactive.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 763–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carroll, L. (1900).Alice’s adventures in wonderland and through the looking glass. New York: Grosset & Dunlap.Google Scholar
  11. Carroll, P. J., &Slowiaczek, M. L. (1987). Modes and modules: Multiple pathways to the language processor. In J. L. Garfield (Ed.),Modularity in knowledge representation and natural-language understanding (pp. 221–247). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  12. Corcoran, D. W. J. (1966). An acoustic factor in letter cancellation.Nature,210, 658.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Cunningham, T. F., Healy, A. F., Kanengiser, N., Chizzick, L., &Willitts, R. L. (1988). Investigating the boundaries of reading units across ages and reading levels.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,45, 175–208.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production.Psychological Review,93, 283–321.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Drewnowski, A. (1978). Detection errors on the wordthe: Evidence for the acquisition of reading levels.Memory & Cognition,6, 403–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Drewnowski, A. (1981). Missing -ing in reading: Developmental changes in reading units.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,31, 154–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Drewnowski, A., &Healy, A. F. (1977). Detection errors onthe andand: Evidence for reading units larger than the word.Memory & Cognition,5, 636–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Drewnowski, A., &Healy, A. F. (1980). Missing in reading: Letter detection errors on word endings.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 247–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Enns, J. T., &Rensink, R. A. (1991). Preattentive recovery of threedimensional orientation from line drawings.Psychological Review,98, 335–351.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Epstein, W. (1961). The influence of syntactical structure on learning.American Journal of Psychology,74, 80–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Forster, K. I., &Ryder, L. A. (1971). Perceiving the structure and meaning of sentences.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,10, 285–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Frost, R., Katz, L., &Bentin, S. (1987). Strategies for visual word recognition and orthographical depth: A multilingual comparison.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,13, 104–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Garrett, M. F. (1975). The analysis of sentence production. In G. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 9, pp. 133–177). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  24. Garrett, M. F. (1980). Levels of processing in sentence production. In B. Butterworth (Ed.),Language production (Vol. 1, pp. 177–220). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  25. Gee, J. P., &Grosjean, F. (1983). Performance structures: A psycholinguistic and linguistic appraisal.Cognitive Psychology,15, 411–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Greenberg, S. N., &Koriat, A. (1991). The missing-letter effect for common function words depends on their linguistic function in the phrase.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 1051–1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Greenberg, S. N.,Koriat, A.,Glastetter, K., &Vellutino, F. R. (1994).Age changes in the missing-letter effect: Evidence of increased reliance on structural extraction in older readers. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  28. Greenberg, S. N., Koriat, A., &Shapiro, A. (1992). The effects of syntactic structure on letter detection in adjacent function words.Memory & Cognition,20, 663–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Haber, R. N., &Schindler, R. M. (1981). Error in proofreading: Evidence of syntactic control of letter processing?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,7, 573–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hadley, J. A., &Healy, A. F. (1991). When are reading units larger than the letter? Refinement of the unitization reading model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 1062–1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Healy, A. F. (1976). Detection errors on the wordthe: Evidence for reading units larger than letters.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,2, 235–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Healy, A. F. (1994). Letter detection: A window to unitization and other cognitive processes in reading text.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 333–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Healy, A. F., Conboy, G. L., &Drewnowski, A. (1987). Characterizing the processing units of reading: Effects of intra- and interword spaces in a letter detection task. In B. K. Britton & S. M. Glynn (Eds.),Executive control processes in reading (pp. 279–296). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  34. Healy, A. F., &Drewnowski, A. (1983). Investigating the boundaries of reading units: Letter detection in misspelled words.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,9, 413–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Healy, A. F., Oliver, W. L., &McNamara, T. P. (1987). Detecting letters in continuous text: Effects of display size.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,13, 279–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Henderson, L. (1982).Orthography and word recognition in reading. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  37. Inhoff, A. W.,Topolski, R.,Vitu, F., &O’Regan, J. K. (1993).Attention demands during reading and the occurrence of brief (express) fixations. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  38. Jacoby, L. L., &Kelley, C. M. (1987). Unconscious influences of memory for a prior event.Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin,13, 314–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Johnston, W. A., &Hawley, K. J. (1994). Perceptual inhibition of expected inputs: The key that opens closed minds.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 56–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Just, M. A., &Carpenter, P. A. (1987).The psychology of reading and language comprehension. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  41. Kelly, M. H. (1992). Using sound to solve syntactic problems: The role of phonology in grammatical category assignments.Psychological Review,99, 349–364.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Kimball, J. (1973). Seven principles of surface structure parsing in natural language.Cognition,2, 15–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Koriat, A. (1984). Reading without vowels: Lexical access in Hebrew. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.),Attention and performance X: Control of language processes (pp. 227–242). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  44. Koriat, A., &Greenberg, S. N. (1991). Syntactic control of letter detection: Evidence from English and Hebrew nonwords.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 1035–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Koriat, A., &Greenberg, S. N. (1993). Prominence of leading functors in function morpheme sequences as evidenced by letter detection.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,19, 34–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Koriat, A., Greenberg, S. N., &Goldshmid, Y. (1991). The missingletter effect in Hebrew: Word frequency or word function?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 66–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Moravcsik, J. E., &Healy, A. F. (1993, November).The effect of meaning on letter detection. Paper presented at the meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  48. Morton, J., &Patterson, K. (1987). “Little words-No!” In M. Coltheart, K. Patterson, & J. C. Marshall (Eds.),Deep dyslexia (pp. 270–285). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  49. Neisser, U. (1967).Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  50. O’Regan, J. K. (1979). Saccade size control in reading: Evidence for the linguistic control hypothesis.Perception & Psychophysics,25, 501–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Polanyi, M. (1958).Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  52. Proctor, J. D., &Healy, A. F. (1985). A secondary-task analysis of a word familiarity effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,11, 286–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rayner, K., Carlson, M., &Frazier, L. (1983). The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,22, 358–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rayner, K., &McConkie, G. W. (1976). What guides a reader’s eye movements?Vision Research,16, 829–837.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Rayner, K., &Pollatsek, A. (1989).The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  56. Rayner, K., Sereno, S. C., Morris, R. K., Schmauder, A. R., &Clifton, C. (1989). Eye movements and on-line language comprehension processes.Language & Cognitive Processes,4, 21–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rommetveit, R. (1960).Selectivity, intuition and halo effects in social perception. Oslo: Oslo University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Sorenson, J. M., Cooper, W. E., &Paccia, J. M. (1978). Speech timing of grammatical categories.Cognition,6, 135–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Umeda, N., &Kahn, D. (1982). Frequency of occurrence of two-and three-word sequences in English.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,72, 2031–2033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Asher Koriat
    • 1
  • Seth N. Greenberg
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of HaifaHaifaIsrael
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUnion CollegeSchenectady

Personalised recommendations