Abstract
Previous research shows that when briefly presented alphabetic stimuli are followed by pattern masks, letters in words are reported more accurately than are isolated letters (the “Word-Letter Phenomenon,” or WLP); however, when these masks are replaced by blank fields, the WLP disappears. These findings have led to the popular notion that the WLP reflects selective masking of ongoing stimulus processing and so critically depends on the use of poststimulus masks. Here we report three experiments which re-examine the role of masking in the WLP by contrasting the effects of postmasked displays with the effects of premasked displays in which words and isolated letters werepreceded by a pattern mask and followedby a completely blank field. Despite the critical role generally assigned to poststimulus pattern masks, similar WLPs were obtained with pre- and postmasked displays. Implications for theories of word and letter recognition are discussed.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Beck, J. (1966). Effect of orientation and of shape similarity on perceptual grouping.Perception & Psychophysics,1, 300–302.
Beck, J. (1967). Perceptual grouping produced by line figures.Perception & Psychophysics,2, 491–495.
Beck, J., &Ambler, B. (1972). Discriminability of differences in line slope and in line arrangement as a function of mask delay.Perception & Psychophysics,12, 33–38.
Beck, J. &Ambler, B. (1973). The effects of concentrated and distributed attention on peripheral acuity.Perception & Psychophysics,14, 225–230.
Bishop, D. V. M. (1988). Can the right hemisphere mediate language as well as the left? A critical review of recent research.Cognitive Neuropsychology,5, 353–367.
Breitmeyer, B. G. (1984).Visual masking: An integrative approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press.
Breitmeyer, B. G., &Ganz, L. (1976). Implications of sustained and transient channels for theories of visual pattern masking, saccadic suppression, and information processing.Psychological Review,83, 1–36.
Carr, T. H., Davidson, B. J., &Hawkins, H. L. (1978). Perceptual flexibility in word recognition: Strategies affect orthographic computation but not lexical access.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,4, 674–690.
Carr, T. H., Lehmkuhle, S. W., Kottas, B., Astor-Stetson, E. C., &Arnold, D. (1976). Target position and practice in the identification of letters in varying contexts: A word superiority effect.Perception & Psychophysics,19, 412–416.
Carroll, J. B., Davies, P., &Richman, B. (1971).The American Heritage word frequency book. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
Duncan, J. (1979). Divided attention: The whole is more than the sum of its parts.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance5, 216–228.
Duncan, J. (1987). Attention and reading: Wholes and parts in shape recognition. In M. Coltheart (Ed.),Attention and performance XlI (pp. 39–61). Hove, U.K.: Erlbaum.
Duncan, J., &Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity.Psychological Review,96, 433–458.
Eriksen, C. W. (1980). The use of a visual mask may seriously confound your experiment.Perception & Psychophysics,28, 89–92.
Estes, W. K. (1975a). The locus of inferential and perceptual processes in letter identification.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,104, 122–145.
Estes, W. K. (1975b). Memory, perception, and decision in letter identification. In R. Solso (Ed.),Information processing and cognition: The Loyola Symposium (pp. 3–30). Potomac, MD: Erlbaum.
Felsten, G., &Wasserman, G. S. (1980). Visual masking: Mechanisms and theories.Psychological Bulletin,88, 329–353.
Ganz, L. (1975). Temporal factors in visual perception. In E. C. Carterette & M. P. Friedman (Eds.),Handbook of perception (Vol. 5, pp. 169–231). New York: Academic Press.
Geschwind, N. (1991). Specializations of the human brain. In W. S.-Y. Wang (Ed.),The emergence of language: Development and evolution (pp. 72–87). New York: W. H. Freeman.
Golden, R. M. (1986). A developmental neural model of visual word perception.Cognitive Science,10, 241–276.
Greenspon, T. S., &Eriksen, C. W. (1968). Interocular nonindependence.Perception & Psychophysics,3, 93–96.
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.
Holender, D. (1979). Identification of letters in words and of single letters with pre- and postknowledge VS. postknowledge of the alternatives.Perception & Psychophysics,25, 313–318.
Humphreys, G. W., Quinlan, P. T., &Ridooch, M. J. (1989). Grouping processes in visual search: Effects with single- and combined-feature targets.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,118, 258–279.
Johnston, J. C. (1978). A test of the sophisticated guessing theory of word perception.Cognitive Psychology,10, 123–153.
Johnston, J. C. (1981). Understanding word perception: Clues from studying the word superiority effect. In O. Tzeng & H. Singer (Eds.),Perception of print: Reading research in experimental psychology (pp. 65–84). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Johnston, J. C., &McClelland, J. L. (1973). Visual factors in word perception.Perception & Psychophysics,14, 365–370.
Johnston, J. C., &McClelland, J. L. (1974). Perception of letters in words: Seek not and ye shall find.Science,184, 1192–1194.
Johnston, J. C., &McClelland, J. L. (1980). Experimental tests of a hierarchical model of word recognition.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 503–524.
Jordan, T. R. (1990). Presenting words without interior letters: Superiority over single letters and influence of postmask boundaries.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 893–909.
Jordan, T. R. (in press). Contrasting effects of letter fragment masks and non-letter fragment fields on alphabetic targets: Examining the role of mask configuration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.
Jordan, T. R., &De Bruun, O. (1993). Word superiority over isolated letters: The neglected role of flanking mask contours.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 549–563.
Jordan, T. R., &Martin, C. D. (1987). The importance of visual angle in word recognition: A “shrinking screen” modification for visual displays.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,19, 307–310.
Juola, J. F., Leavitt, D. D., &Choe, C. S. (1974). Letter identification in word, nonword, and single-letter displays.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,4, 278–280.
Kahneman, D. (1968). Method, findings, and theory in studies of visual masking.Psychological Bulletin,70, 404–426.
Kietzman, M. L., Boyle, R. C., &Lindsley, D. B. (1971). Perceptual masking: Peripheral vs central factors.Perception & Psychophysics,9(4), 350–352.
Kolers, P. A. (1968). Some psychological aspects of pattern recognition. In P. A. Kolers & M. Eden (Eds.),Recognizing patterns. Boston: MIT Press.
Marchetti, F. M., &Mewhort, D. J. K. (1986). On the word-superiority effect.Psychological Research,48, 23–35.
Massaro, D. W., &Klitzke, D. (1979). The role of lateral masking and orthographic structure in letter and word recognition.Acta Psychologica,43, 413–426.
McClelland, J. L. (1985). Putting knowledge in its place: A scheme for programming parallel structures on the fly.Cognitive Science,9, 113–146.
McClelland, J. L. (1986). The programmable blackboard model of reading. In J. L. McClelland & D. E. Rumelhart (Eds.),Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition (Vol. 2, pp. 122–169). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
McClelland, J. L. (1991). Stochastic interactive processes and the effect of context on perception.Cognitive Psychology,23, 1–44.
McClelland, J. L., &Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part I. An account of basic findings.Psychological Review,88, 375–407.
McClelland, J. L., &Rumelhart, D. E. (1988).Explorations in parallel distributed processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mewhort, D. J. K., &Johns, E. E. (1988). Some tests of the interactive-activation model for word identification.Psychological Research,50, 135–147.
Michaels, C. F., &Turvey, M. T. (1979). Central sources of visual masking: Indexing structures supporting seeing at a single, brief glance.Psychological Research,41, 1–61.
Moscovitch, M. (1986). Hemispheric specialization, interhemispheric codes, and transmission times: Inferences from visual masking studies in normal people. In F. Lepore, M. Ptito, & H. H. Jasper (Eds.),Two hemispheres-one brain: Functions of the corpus callosum (pp, 483–510). New York: Liss.
Paap, K. R., Newsome, S. L., Mcdonald, J. E., &Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1982). An activation-verification model for letter and word recognition: The word-superiority effect.Psychological Review,89, 573–594.
Prinzmetal, W. (1992). The word-superiority effect does not require a T-scope.Perception & Psychophysics,51, 473–484.
Purcell, D. G., &Stanovich, K. E. (1982). Some boundary conditions for a word superiority effect.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,34A, 117–134.
Reicher, G. M. (1969). Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material.Journal of Experimental Psychology,81, 275–280.
Rumelhart, D. E., &McClelland, J. L. (1982). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 2. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model.Psychological Review,89, 60–94.
Rumelhart, D. E., &Siple, P. (1974). The process of recognizing tachistoscopically presented words.Psychological Review,81, 99–118.
Schiller, P. H. (1966). Forward and backward masking as a function of relative overlap and intensity of test and masking stimuli.Perception & Psychophysics,1, 161–164.
Schiller, P. H., &Smith, M. C. (1965). A comparison of forward and backward masking.Psychonomic Science,3, 77–78.
Smith, M. C., &Schiller, P. H. (1966). Forward and backward masking: A comparison.Canadian Journal of Psychology,20, 337–342.
Sperling, G. (1960). The information available in brief visual presentations.Psychological Monographs,74 (Whole No. 498).
Sperling, G. (1965). Temporal and spatial visual masking: I. Masking by impulse flash.Journal of the Optical Society of America,55, 541–559.
Taylor, G. A., &Chabot, R. J. (1978). Differential backward masking of words and letters by masks of varying orthographic structure.Memory & Cognition,6, 629–635.
Treisman, A., &Gelade, G. (1980). A feature integration theory of attention.Cognitive Psychology,12, 97–136.
Treisman, A., &Gormican, S. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries.Psychological Review,95, 15–48.
Turvey, M. T. (1973). On peripheral and central processes in vision.Psychological Review,80, 1–52.
Wheeler, D. D. (1970). Processes in word recognition.Cognitive Psychology,1, 59–85.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by Grant SPG 8931914 from the Joint Council Initiative in Cognitive Science and was reported at the September 1992 meeting of the European Society for Cognitive Psychology in Paris.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jordan, T.R., Bevan, K.M. Word superiority over isolated letters: The neglected case of forward masking. Memory & Cognition 22, 133–144 (1994). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208885
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208885