How do Scrabble players encode letter position during reading?

  1. Manuel Perea 1
  2. Ana Marcet 1
  3. Pablo Gómez 2
  1. 1 Universitat de València
    info

    Universitat de València

    Valencia, España

    ROR https://ror.org/043nxc105

  2. 2 DePaul University
    info

    DePaul University

    Chicago, Estados Unidos

    ROR https://ror.org/04xtx5t16

Journal:
Psicothema

ISSN: 0214-9915

Year of publication: 2016

Volume: 28

Issue: 1

Pages: 7-12

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Psicothema

Abstract

Background: A number of experiments with skilled adult readers have shown that a transposed-letter pseudoword (e.g., CHOLOCATE) is considerably more word-like than a control replacement-letter pseudoword (e.g., CHOTONATE). For instance, in lexical decision, response times are longer and less accurate for CHOLOCATE than for CHOTONATE (i.e., a transposed-letter effect). Method: Here, we examined how letter position coding is attained in individuals who excel in orthographic-lexical processing: competitive Scrabble players. To this end, we conducted a lexical decision experiment with two types of pseudowords (transposed-letter vs. replacement-letter pseudowords). Results: Data showed that while the transposed-letter effect does occur in expert Scrabble players, the magnitude of the effect is dramatically smaller than in a control group of university students—in particular, for the accuracy data. Conclusions: The parameters responsible for the flexibility of letter position coding in models of visual word recognition must be modulated by the degree of expertise in orthographic-lexical processing

Bibliographic References

  • Acha, J., & Perea, M. (2008). The effects of length and transposed-letter similarity in lexical decision: Evidence with beginning, intermediate, and adult readers. British Journal of Psychology, 99, 245-264.
  • Adelman, J. S. (2011). Letters in time and retinotopic space. Psychological Review, 118, 570-582.
  • Andrews, S., & Lo, S. (2012). Not all skilled readers have cracked the code: Individual differences in masked form priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 152-163.
  • Bilalić, M., Langner, R., Erb, M., & Grodd, W. (2010). Mechanisms and neural basis of object and pattern recognition: A study with chess experts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139, 728-742.
  • Carreiras, M., Armstrong, B. C., Perea, M., & Frost, R. (2014). The what, when, where, and how of visual word recognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 90-98.
  • Carreiras, M., Vergara, M., & Perea, M. (2007). ERP correlates of transposed-letter similarity effects: Are consonants processed differently from vowels? Neuroscience Letters, 419, 219-224.
  • Castles, A., Davis, C., & Forster, K. I. (2003). Word recognition development in children: Insights from masked-priming. In S. Kinoshita & S. Lupker (Eds.), Masked priming: State of the art (pp. 345-360). Hove, England: Psychology Press.
  • Castles, A., Davis, C., Cavalot, P., & Forster, K. (2007). Tracking the acquisition of orthographic skills in developing readers: Masked priming effects. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 97, 165-182.
  • Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204-256.
  • Davis, C. J. (2010). The spatial coding model of visual word identifi cation. Psychological Review, 117, 713-758.
  • Dehaene, S., & Cohen, L. (2007). Cultural recycling of cortical maps. Neuron, 56, 384-398.
  • Ericsson, K. A. (2014). Why expert performance is special and cannot be extrapolated from studies of performance in the general population: A response to criticisms. Intelligence, 45, 81-103.
  • Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 35, 116-124.
  • Frost, R. (2012). Towards a universal model of reading. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35, 263-279.
  • Gómez, P., Ratcliff, R., & Perea, M. (2008). The overlap model: A model of letter position coding. Psychological Review, 115, 577-601.
  • Grainger, J., & Jacobs, M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review, 103, 518-565.
  • Grainger, J., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2003). Modeling letter position coding in printed word perception. In P. Bonin (Ed.), Mental lexicon: Some words to talk about words (pp. 1-23). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
  • Gu, J., & Li, X. (2015). The effects of character transposition within and across words in Chinese reading. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77, 272-281.
  • Halpern, D. F., & Wai, J. (2007). The world of competitive Scrabble: Novice and expert differences in visuopatial and verbal abilities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 13, 79-94.
  • Hargreaves, I. S., Pexman, P. M., Zdrazilova, L., & Sargious, P. (2012). How a hobby can shape cognition: Visual word recognition in competitive Scrabble players. Memory & Cognition, 40, 1-7.
  • Lupker, S. J., Perea, M., & Davis, C. J. (2008). Transposed letter priming effects: Consonants, vowels and letter frequency. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 93-116.
  • McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407.
  • Norris, D., Kinoshita, S., & van Casteren, M. (2010). A stimulus sampling theory of letter identity and order. Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 254-271.
  • Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (2006). Do transposed-letter effects occur across lexeme boundaries? Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13, 418-422.
  • Perea, M., & Estévez, A. (2008). Transposed-letter similarity effects in naming pseudowords: Evidence from children and adults. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 20, 33-46.
  • Perea, M., & Lupker, S. J. (2004). Can CANISO activate CASINO? Transposed-letter similarity effects with nonadjacent letter positions. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 231-246.
  • Perea, M., & Pérez, E. (2009). Beyond alphabetic orthographies: The role of form and phonology in transposition effects in Katakana. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24, 67-88.
  • Perea, M., Abu Mallouh, R., & Carreiras, M. (2010). The search of an input coding scheme: Transposed-letter priming in Arabic. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 17, 375-380.
  • Perea, M., Winskel, H., & Ratitamkul, T. (2012). On the flexibility of letter position coding during lexical processing: The case of Thai. Experimental Psychology, 59, 68-73.
  • Protzner, A. B., Hargreaves, I. S., Campbell, J. A., Myers-Stewart, K., van Hees, S., Goodyear, B. G., ... & Pexman, P. M. (2015). This is your brain on Scrabble: Neural correlates of visual word recognition in competitive Scrabble players as measured during task and resting-state. Cortex. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.03.015
  • Ratcliff, R., Gómez, P., & McKoon, G. (2004). A diffusion model account of the lexical decision task. Psychological Review, 111, 159-182.
  • Rayner, K., White, S. J., Johnson, R. L., & Liversedge, S. P. (2006). Raeding wrods with jubmled lettres: There is a cost. Psychological Science, 17, 192-193.
  • Schoonbaert, S., & Grainger, J. (2004). Letter position coding in printed word perception: Effects of repeated and transposed letters. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 333-367.
  • Taft, M., & Van Graan, F. (1998). Lack of phonological mediation in a semantic categorization task. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 203-224.
  • Velan, H., & Frost, R. (2011). Words with and without internal structure: What determines the nature of orthographic and morphological processing? Cognition, 118, 141-156.
  • Whitney, C. (2001). How the brain encodes the order of letters in a printed word: The SERIOL model and selective literature review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 221-243.
Data source: Dialnet