Abstract
Previous work indicates that the locus of the word-superiority effect in letter detection is nonvisual and that letter names, but not letter shapes, are more accessible in words than in nonwords, that is, scrambled collections of letters (e.g., Krueger & Shapiro, 1979; Krueger & Stadtlander, 1991; Massaro, 1979). The nonvisual (verbal or lexical) coding may be phonological, or it may be more abstract. In the present study, a word advantage in the speed of letter detection was found even when the target letter was silent in the six-letter test word (e.g., s inisland). Other test words varied in their frequency of occurrence in English and number of syllables (1, 2, or 3). The word advantage was larger for higher frequencywords but was not affected by syllable length. The presence of unpronounceable nonwords and silent letters in the words discouraged reliance upon the phonological code but did not thereby eliminate the word advantage. Thus, the word-superiority effect with free viewing is not based entirely upon phonological recoding.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Banks, W. P., Oka, E., &Shugarman, S. (1981). Recoding of printed words to internal speech: Does recoding come before lexical access? In O. J. L. Tzeng & H. Singer (Eds.),Perception of print: Reading research in experimental psychology (pp. 137–170). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Baron, J., &Thurston, I. (1973). An analysis of the word-superiority effect.Cognitive Psychology,4, 207–228.
Chastain, G. (1981). Phonological and orthographic factors in the wordsuperiority effect.Memory & Cognition,9, 389–397.
Chastain, G. (1987). Visually-presented letter strings typically are encoded phonologically: Some converging evidence.Journal of General Psychology,114, 147–156.
Corcoran, D. W. J. (1966). An acoustic factor in letter cancellation.Nature,210, 658.
Corcoran, D. W. J. (1967). Acoustic factors in proof reading.Nature,214, 851–852.
Corcoran, D. W. J., &Weening, D. L. (1968). Acoustic factors in visual search.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology.20, 83–85.
Drewnowski, A., &Healy, A. F. (1982). Phonetic factors in letter detection: A reevaluation.Memory & Cognition,10, 145–154.
Gielen, I., Brysbaert, M., &Dhondt, A. (1991). The syllable-length effect in number processing is task-dependent.Perception & Psychophysics,50, 449–458.
Goldman, H. B., &Healy, A. F. (1985). Detection errors in a task with articulatory suppression: Phonological recoding and reading.Memory & Cognition,13, 463–468.
Hanna, P. R., Hanna, J. S., Hodges, R. E., &Rudorf, E. H., Jr. (1966).Phoneme-grapheme correspondences as cues to spelling improvement (Bureau of Research, Office of Education). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Hawkins, H. L., Reicher, G. M., Rogers, M., &Peterson, L. (1976). Flexible coding in word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,2, 380–385.
Henderson, L. (1973). Effects of letter-names on visual search.Cognitive Psychology,5, 90–96.
Henderson, L. (1975). Do words conceal their component letters? A critique of Johnson (1975) on the visual perception of words.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,14, 648–650.
Humphreys, G. W., &Evett, L. J. (1985). Are there independent lexical and nonlexical routes in word processing? An evaluation of the dual-route theory of reading.Behavioral& Brain Sciences,8, 689–740.
Johnson, N. F., Allen, P. A., &Strand, T. L. (1989). On the role of word frequency in the detection of component letters.Memory & Cognition,17, 474–482.
Johnston, J. C. (1981). Effects of advance precuing of alternatives on the perception of letters alone and in words.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,7, 560–572.
Johnston, J. C.,&McClelland, J. L. (1973). Visual factors in word perception.Perception & Psychophysics,14, 365–370.
Krueger, L. E. (1970a). The effect of acoustic confusability on visual search.American Journal of Psychology,83, 389–400.
Krueger, L. E. (1970b). Search time in a redundant visual display.Journal of Experimental Psychology,83, 391–399.
Krueger, L. E. (1970c). Visual comparison in a redundant display.Cognitive Psychology,1, 341–357.
Krueger, L. E. (1975a). Familiarity effects in visual information processing.Psychological Bulletin,82, 949–974.
Krueger, L. E. (1975b). The word-superiority effect: Is its locus visualspatial or verbal?Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,6, 465–468.
Krueger, L. E., &Shapiro, R. G. (1979), Letter detection with rapid serial visual presentation: Evidence against word superiority at featare extraction.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,5, 657–673.
Krueger, L. E., &Stadtlander, L. M. (1991). Detection of letter repetition in words and nonwords: The effect of opposite-case distractors.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 942–950.
Kučera, H., &Francis, W. N. (1967).Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
Massaro, D. W. (1979). Letter information and orthographic context in word perception.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,5, 595–609.
Massaro, D. W., Venezky, R. L., &Taylor, G. A. (1979). Orthographic regularity, positional frequency, and visual processing of letter strings.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,108, 107–124.
Mayzner, M. S., &Tresselt, M. E. (1965). Tables of single-letter and digram frequency counts for various word-length and letter-position combinations.Psychonomic Monograph Supplements,1, 13–32.
Mayzner, M. S., Tresselt, M. E., &Wolin, B. R. (1965). Tables of trigram frequency counts for various word-length and letter-position combinations.Psychonomic Monograph Supplements,1, 33–78.
McCusker, L. X., Hillinger, M. L., &Bias, R. G. (1981). Phonological recoding and reading.Psychological Bulletin,89, 217–245.
Prinzmetal, W., Hoffman, H., &Vest, K. (1991). Automatic processes in word perception: An analysis from illusory conjunctions.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 902–923.
Prinzmetal, W., Treiman, R., &Rho, S. H. (1986). How to see a reading unit.Journal of Memory & Language,25, 461–475.
Read, J. D. (1983). Detection of Fs in a Single statement: The role of phonetic recoding.Memory & Cognition,11, 390–399.
Reicher, G. M. (1969). Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material.Journal of Experimental Psychology,81, 275–280.
Shulman, H. G., Hornak, R., &Sanders, E. (1978). The effects of graphemic, phonetic, and semantic relationships on access to lexical structures.Memory & Cognition,6, 115–123.
Singer, M. H. (1980). The primacy of visual information inthe analysis of letter strings.Perception & Psychophysics,27, 153–162.
Spoehr, K. T. (1978). Phonological encoding in visual word recognition.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,17, 127–141.
Spoehr, K. T., &Smith, E. E. (1973). The role of syllables in perceptual processing.Cognitive Psychology,5, 71–89.
Thompson, M. C., &Massaro, D. W. (1973). Visual information and redundancy in reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology,98, 49–54.
Van Orden, O. C., Pennington, B. F., &Stone, G. O. (1990). Word identification in reading and the promise of subsymbolic psycholinguistics.Psychological Review,97, 488–522.
Venezky, R. L., &Massaro, D. W. (1987). Orthographic structure and spelling-sound regularity in reading English words. In A. Allport, D. MacKay, W. Prinz,& E. Scheerer (Eds.),Language perception and production: Shared mechanisms in listening, speaking, reading and writing (pp. 159–179). London: Academic Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The author is grateful to Alice F. Healy, Dominic W. Massaro, Margaret J. Intons-Peterson, and Leann M. Stadtlander for helpful comments on an earlier version of this report.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Krueger, L.E. The word-superiority effect and phonological recoding. Mem Cogn 20, 685–694 (1992). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202718
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202718