Abstract
Reaction times in a simultaneous visual matching task were obtained for four types of letter strings: high-frequency words, low-frequency words, orthographically legal nonwords, e.g., CRAWN, and random letter strings. Two findings supported the notion that the matching of word items involves lexical access. First, words were processed faster than legal nonwords, indicating that the analysis of words uses an additional source of information apart from the constraints imposed by orthographic rules. Second, high-frequency words were processed faster than low-frequency words, indicating lexical search. It is proposed that three levels of identification and comparison operate simultaneously in the matching task: at a word level, a letter cluster level, and a letter level. The results of a second experiment give some support to the idea that these levels operate for “different” items as well as “same” items. Whether familiarity effects will be observed for “different” items will depend on the amount of identification and comparison of the two letter strings which is necessary before a difference is detected.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bamber, D. Reaction times and error rates for “same-different” judgements of multidimensional stimuli. Perception & Psychophysics, 1969, 6, 169–174.
Baron, B., & Thurston, I. An analysis of the word-superiority effect. Cognitive Psychology, 1973, 4,207–228.
Barron, R. W., & Pittenger, J. B. The effect of orthographic structure and lexical meaning onsame-different judgements. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1974, 26, 566–581.
Berry, C. Advanced frequency information and verbal response times. Psychonomic Science, 1971, 23,151–2.
Clark, H. H. The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1973, 12, 335–359
Egeth, H. E. Parallel versus serial processes in multidimensional stimulus discrimination. Perception & Psychophysics, 1966, 1, 245–252.
Egeth, H., & Blecker, D. Differential effects of familiarity on judgements of sameness and difference. Perception & Psychophysics, 1971, 9, 321–326.
Eichelman, W. H. Familiarity effects in the simultaneous matching task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970, 86, 275–282.
Forster, K. I., & Chambers, S. M. Lexical access and naming time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1973, 12, 627–635.
Henderson, L. A word superiority effect wihtout orthographic assistance. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1974, 26, 301–311.
Krueger, L. E. Search time in a redundant visual display. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970, 83, 391–399. (a)
Krueger L. E. Visual comparison in a redundant visual display. Cognitive Psychology, 1970, 1, 342–357.(b)
Mayzner, M. S. & Tresselt, M. E. Tables of single-letter and digram frequency counts for various word length and letter-position combinations. Psychonomic Monographs Supplements, 1965, 1, 13–32
Mayzner, M. S., Tresselt, M. E., & Wolin, B. R. Tables of trigram frequency counts for various word-length and letter-position combinations. Psychonomic Monograph Supplements, 1965, 1, 33–78.
Nickerson, R. S. “Same”-“Different” response times with multi-attribute stimulus differences. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1967, 24, 543–554.
Reicher, G. M. Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969, 81, 275–280.
Rubenstein, H., Garfield, L., & Millikan, J. A. Homographic entries in the internal lexicon. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1970, 9, 487–494.
Thorndike, E. L., & Lorge, I.The teacher’s word book of 30,000 words. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, Bureau of Publications, 1944.
Wheeler, D. D. Processes in word recognition. Cognitive Psychlogy, 1970, 1, 59–85
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chambers, S.M., Forster, K.I. Evidence for lexical access in a simultaneous matching task. Memory & Cognition 3, 549–559 (1975). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197530
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197530