Advertisement

Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation

, Volume 15, Issue 6, pp 577–579 | Cite as

Knowledge of the alphabet: A comparison between letter counts and subjective reports

  • Philip H. Marshall
  • Clay E. George
Methods & Designs
  • 232 Downloads

Abstract

Subjects’ estimates of the frequency of occurrence of the letters of the alphabet were compared with previously reported letter-frequency counts. The results indicated an overall good relationship between actual and judged rank, but there were consistent letter-specific under- and overestimations. These inaccuracies were not accounted for by letter versatility, first-position frequency, or order in the alphabet. There was evidence that subject-derived estimates of letter frequency were somewhat better predictors of reaction time performance on letter-processing tasks.

Keywords

Word Recognition Frequency Judgment Reaction Time Performance Reaction Time Study Letter Frequency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Appelman, I. B., &Mayzner, M. S. The letter-frequency effect and the generality of familiarity effects on perception.Perception & Psychophysics, 1981,30, 436–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Attneave, F. Psychological probability as a function of experienced frequency.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1953,46, 81–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Clement, D. E., &Carpenter, J. S. Relative discriminability of visually-presented letter pairs using a same-different choicereaction time task.Psychonomic Science, 1970,20, 363–364.Google Scholar
  4. Cosky, M. J. The role of letter recognition in word recognition.Memory & Cognition, 1976,4, 207–214.Google Scholar
  5. Egeth, H., Brownell, H., &Geoffrion, L. Testing the role of symmetry in letter matching.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1976,2, 429–434.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Fox, J. The use of structural diagnostics in recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1975,1, 57–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Podoorny, P., &Garner, W. R. Reaction time as a measure of inter-and intraobject visual similarity: Letters of the alphabet.Perception & Psychophysics, 1979,26, 37–52.Google Scholar
  8. Rubin, D. C. 51 properties of 125 words: A unit analysis of verbal behavior.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1980,19, 736–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Solso, R. L., Juel, C., &Rubin, D. C. The frequency and versatility of initial and terminal letters in English words.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1982,21, 220–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Solso, R. L., &King, J. F. Frequency and versatility of letters in the English language.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 1976,8, 285–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philip H. Marshall
    • 1
  • Clay E. George
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PscyhologyTexas Tech UniversityLubbock

Personalised recommendations