Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-shngb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T00:41:00.236Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Developing a universal model of reading necessitates cracking the orthographic code

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 August 2012

Colin J. Davis
Colin J. Davis*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, United Kingdom. c.davis@rhul.ac.uk http://www.pc.rhul.ac.uk/staff/c.davis/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I argue, contra Frost, that when prime lexicality and target density are considered, it is not clear that there are fundamental differences between form priming effects in Semitic and European languages. Furthermore, identifying and naming printed words in these languages raises common theoretical problems. Solving these problems and developing a universal model of reading necessitates “cracking” the orthographic input code.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 35 , Issue 5 , October 2012 , pp. 283 - 284
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Andrews, S. (1996) Lexical retrieval and selection processes: Effects of transposed-letter confusability. Journal of Memory and Language 35(6):775–800.Google Scholar
Andrews, S. (2006) All about words: A lexicalist perspective on reading. In: From inkmarks to ideas: Current issues in lexical processing, ed. Andrews, S., pp. 314–48. Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Andrews, S. & Davis, C. J. (1999) Interactive activation accounts of morphological decomposition: Finding the trap in mousetrap? Brain and Language 68:355–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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 108:204–56.Google Scholar
Davis, C. J. (1999) The self-organising lexical acquisition and recognition (SOLAR) model of visual word recognition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of New South Wales.Google Scholar
Davis, C. J. (2010) The spatial coding model of visual word identification. Psychological Review 117:713–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, C. J. & Lupker, S. J. (2006) Masked inhibitory priming in English: Evidence for lexical inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 32:668–87.Google Scholar
Forster, K. I. & Davis, C. (1991) The density constraint on form-priming in the naming task: Interference effects from a masked prime. Journal of Memory and Language 30:1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, A. M. & Grainger, J. (1994) Models of visual word recognition – Sampling the state of the art. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 20:1311–34.Google Scholar
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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perea, M. & Rosa, E. (2000b) The density constraint also occurs with unmasked, visible primes in the lexical decision task. Current Psychology Letters 2:61–72.Google Scholar
Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C. & Zorzi, M. (2007) Nested incremental modeling in the development of computational theories: The CDP+ model of reading aloud. Psychological Review 114:273–315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plaut, D. C., McClelland, J. L., Seidenberg, M. S. & Patterson, K. (1996) Understanding normal and impaired word reading: Computational principles in quasi-regular domains. Psychological Review 103:56–115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seidenberg, M. S. & McClelland, J. L. (1989) A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review 96:523–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Velan, H. & Frost, R. (2009) Letter-transposition effects are not universal: The impact of transposing letters in Hebrew. Journal of Memory and Language 61:285–320.Google Scholar