Differences in the Processing of Prefixes and Suffixes Revealed by a Letter-Search Task

REFERENCES

• Andrews, S., & Lo, S. (2013). Is morphological priming stronger for transparent than opaque words? It depends on individual differences in spelling and vocabulary. Journal of Memory & Language, 68, 279–296. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1-5. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4
   Google Scholar
• Beauvillain, C. (1996). The integration of morphological and wholeword form information during eye fixations on prefixed and suffixed words. Journal of Memory & Language, 35, 801–820. doi:10.1006/jmla.1996.0041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergman, M. W., Hudson, P. T. W., & Eling, P. A. T. M. (1988). How simple complex words can be: Morphological processing and word representations. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 40, 41–72. doi:10.1080/14640748808402282
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beyersmann, E., Casalis, S., Ziegler, J. C., & Grainger, J. (2014). Language proficiency and morpho-orthographic segmentation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. Advance online publication. doi:10.3758/s13423-014-0752-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beyersmann, E., Castles, A., & Coltheart, M. (2011). Early morphological decomposition during visual word recognition: Evidence from masked transposed-letter priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 937–942. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0120-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brand, M., Giroux, I., Puijalon, C., & Rey, A. (2007). Syllable onsets are perceptual reading units. Memory & Cognition, 35, 966–973. doi:10.3758/BF03193469
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colé, P., Beauvillain, C., & Segui, J. (1989). On the representation and processing of prefixed and suffixed derived words: A differential frequency effect. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 1–13. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(89)90025-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crepaldi, D., Hemsworth, L., Davis, C. J., & Rastle, K. (2015). Masked suffix priming and morpheme positional constraints. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1–16. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/17470218.2015.1027713
   Google Scholar
• Crepaldi, D., Rastle, K., & Davis, C. J. (2010). Morphemes in their place: Evidence for position-specific identification of suffixes. Memory & Cognition, 38, 312–321. doi:10.3758/MC.38.3.312
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crepaldi, D., Rastle, K., Davis, C. J., & Lupker, S. J. (2013). Seeing stems everywhere: Position-independent identification of stem morphemes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 510–525.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, C. J. (1999). The self-organising lexical acquisition and recognition (SOLAR) model of visual word recognition ( Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Diependaele, K., Grainger, J., & Sandra, D. (2012). Derivational morphology and skilled reading: An empirical overview. In M. Spivey, M. Joanisse, & K. McRae (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics ( pp. 311–332). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Diependaele, K., Morris, J., Serota, R. M., Bertrand, D., & Grainger, J. (2013). Breaking boundaries: Letter transpositions and morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28, 988–1003. doi:10.1080/01690965.2012.719082
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diependaele, K., Sandra, D., & Grainger, J. (2009). Semantic transparency and masked morphological priming: The case of prefixed words. Memory & Cognition, 37, 895–908. doi:10.3758/MC.37.6.895
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drewnowski, A., & Healy, A. F. (1980). Missing -ing in reading: Letter detection errors on word’ endings. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 247–262. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90212-1
   Google Scholar
• Duñabeitia, J. A., Laka, I., Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (2009). Is Milkman a superhero like Batman? Constituent morphological priming in compound words. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 21, 615–640. doi:10.1080/09541440802079835
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duñabeitia, J. A., Marín, A., Avilés, A., Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (2009). Constituent priming effects: Evidence for preserved morphological processing in healthy old readers. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 21, 283–302. doi:10.1080/09541440802281142
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duñabeitia, J. A., Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (2008). Does darkness lead to happiness? Masked suffix priming effects. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 1002–1020. doi:10.1080/01690960802164242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, L. B., & Larabee, J. (2001). Morphological facilitation following prefixed but not suffixed primes: Lexical architecture or modality-specific processes? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 680–691.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiorentino, R., & Fund-Reznicek, E. (2009). Masked morphological priming of compound constituents. The Mental Lexicon, 4, 159–193. doi:10.1075/ml.4.2
   Google Scholar
• Giraudo, H., & Grainger, J. (2003). On the role of derivational affixes in recognizing complex words: Evidence from masked priming. In R. H. Baayen & R. Schreuder (Eds.), Morphological structure in language processing ( pp. 209–232). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Grainger, J., Colé, P., & Segui, J. (1991). Masked morphological priming in visual word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language & Speech, 30, 370–384. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(91)90042-I
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grainger, J., & Ziegler, J. C. (2011). A dual-route approach to orthographic processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 45. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00054
   Google Scholar
• Gross, J., Treiman, R., & Inman, J. (2000). The role of phonology in a letter detection task. Memory & Cognition, 28, 349–357. doi:10.3758/BF03198550
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healy, A. F. (1994). Letter detection: A window to unitization and other cognitive processes in reading text. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 333–344. doi:10.3758/BF03213975
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kazanina, N. (2011). Decomposition of prefixed words in Russian. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 37, 1371–1390.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, S. Y., Wang, M., & Taft, M. (2015). Morphological decomposition in the recognition of prefixed and suffixed words: Evidence from Korean. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19, 183–203. doi:10.1080/10888438.2014.991019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koriat, A., & Greenberg, S. N. (1993). Prominence of leading functors in function morpheme sequences as evidenced by letter detection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19, 34–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2014). lmerTest: Tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models (lmer objects of lme4 package): R package version 2.0-6. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lmerTest.
   Google Scholar
• Longtin, C.-M., Segui, J., & Hallé, P. A. (2003). Morphological priming without morphological relationship. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18, 313–334. doi:10.1080/01690960244000036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meunier, F., & Segui, J. (2002). Cross-modal morphological priming in French. Brain and Language, 81, 89–102. doi:10.1006/brln.2001.2509
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• New, B., Pallier, C., Brysbaert, M., & Ferrand, L. (2004). Lexique 2: A new French lexical database. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 516–524. doi:10.3758/BF03195598
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2008). Morphological decomposition based on the analysis of orthography. Language & Cognitive Processes, 23, 942–971. doi:10.1080/01690960802069730
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rastle, K., Davis, M. H., & New, B. (2004). The broth in my brother’s brothel: Morpho-orthographic segmentation in visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1090–1098. doi:10.3758/BF03196742
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RDevelopmentCoreTeam. (2008). R: A language and environment for statistical computing: R package version 1.1-5. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4.
   Google Scholar
• Reicher, G. M. (1969). Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 275–280. doi:10.1037/h0027768
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rey, A., Ziegler, J. C., & Jacobs, A. M. (2000). Graphemes are perceptual reading units. Cognition, 75, B1–12. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00078-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roy-Charland, A., Saint-Aubin, J., Klein, R. M., & Lawrence, M. (2007). Eye movements as direct tests of the GO model for the missing-letter effect. Perception & Psychophysics, 69, 324–337. doi:10.3758/BF03193753
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.89.1.60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shoolman, N., & Andrews, S. (2003). Racehorses, reindeer, and sparrows: Using masked priming to investigate morphological influences on compound word identification. In S. Kinoshita & S. J. Lupker (Eds.), Masked priming: The state of the art. Macquarie monographs in cognitive science ( pp. 241–278). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taft, M. (2004). Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 745–765. doi:10.1080/02724980343000477
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taft, M., & Forster, K. I. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 638–647. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(75)80051-X
   Google Scholar
• Van Orden, G. C., & Goldinger, S. D. (1994). Interdependence of form and function in cognitive systems explains perception of printed words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 1269–1291.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wheeler, D. D. (1970). Processes in word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 1, 59–85. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(70)90005-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar