The role of lexical expertise in reading homophones

REFERENCES

• Adelman, J. S., Brown, G. D. A., & Quesada, J. F. (2006). Contextual diversity, not word frequency, determines word-naming and lexical decision times. Psychological Science, 17(9), 814–823. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01787.x
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, S. (2012). Individual differences in skilled visual word recognition and reading: The role of lexcial quality. In J. S. Adelman (Ed.), Visual word recognition (Vol. 2, pp. 151–172). Hove, England: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, S. (2015). Individual differences amiong skilled readers: The role of lexical quaility. In A. Pollatsek & R. Treiman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of reading (pp. 129–138). New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, S., & Bond, R. (2009). Lexical expertise and reading skill: Bottom-up and top-down processing of lexical ambiguity. Reading and Writing, 22(6), 687–711. doi:10.1007/s11145-008-9137-7
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, S., & Hersch, J. (2010). Lexical precision in skilled readers: Individual differences in masked neighbor priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139(2), 299–318. doi:10.1037/a0018366
   Google Scholar
• 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(1), 152–163. doi:10.1037/a0024953
   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
   Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
   Google Scholar
• Bowers, J. S., Vigliocco, G., & Haan, R. (1998). Orthographic, phonological, and articulatory contributions to masked letter and word priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(6), 1705–1719. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.24.6.1705
   Google Scholar
• Bowey, J. A. (1995). Socioeconomic status differences in preschool phonological sensitivity and first-grade reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 476–487. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.87.3.476
   Google Scholar
• Bradley, L., & Bryant, P. (1985). Rhyme and reason in reading and spelling. Ann Arbor, Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, P., Lupker, S. J., & Colombo, L. (1994). Interacting sources of information in word naming: A study of individual differences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(3), 537–554. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.20.3.537
   Google Scholar
• Bruck, M., Treiman, R., Caravolas, M., Genesee, F., & Cassar, M. (1998). Spelling skills of children in whole language and phonics classrooms. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19(4), 669–684. doi: 10.1017/S0142716400010419
   Google Scholar
• Burt, J. S. (2006). Spelling in adults: The combined influences of language skills and reading experience. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35(5), 447–470. doi:10.1007/s10936-006-9024-9
   Google Scholar
• Burt, J. S., & Fury, M. B. (2000). Spelling in adults: The role of reading skills and experience. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 13(1–2), 1–30. doi:10.1023/A:1008071802996
   Google Scholar
• Burt, J. S., & Heffernan, M. E. (2012). Reading and spelling in adults: Are there lexical and sub-lexical subtypes? Journal of Research in Reading, 35(2), 183–203. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01455.x
   Google Scholar
• Castles, A., Holmes, V. M., & Wong, M. (1997). Variations in spelling style among lexical and sublexical readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 64, 98–118. doi:10.1006/jecp.1996.2339
   Google Scholar
• Chateau, D., & Jared, D. (2000). Exposure to print and word recognition process. Memory & Cognition, 28(1), 143–153. doi: 10.3758/BF03211582
   Google Scholar
• 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(1), 204–256. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.1.204
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1990). Assessing print exposure and orthographic processing skill in children: A quick measure of reading experience. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4), 733–740. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.4.733
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1997). Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later. Developmental Psychology, 33(6), 934–945. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.33.6.934
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, J. D., Pexman, P. M., & Hudson, C. E. (2004). Exploring the dynamics of the visual word recognition system: Homophone effects in LDT and naming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19(4), 503–532. doi: 10.1080/01690960344000215
   Google Scholar
• Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Stahl, S. A., & Willows, D. M. (2001). Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel's meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 393–447. doi:10.3102/00346543071003393
   Google Scholar
• Ferrand, L., & Grainger, J. (2003). Homophone interference effects in visual word recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 56(3), 403–419. doi: 10.1080/02724980244000422
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, F. W., Shankweiler, D., & Liberman, I. Y. (1985). Spelling proficiency and sensitivity to word structure. Journal of Memory and Language, 24(4), 423–441. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(85)90038-5
   Google Scholar
• Gernsbacher, M. A., & Faust, M. E. (1991). The mechanism of suppression: A component of general comprehension skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17(2), 245–262. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.17.2.245
   Google Scholar
• Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2011). Writing to read: A meta-analysis of the impact of writing and writing instruction on reading. Harvard Educational Review, 81(4), 710–744. doi: 10.17763/haer.81.4.t2k0m13756113566
   Google Scholar
• Graham, S., & Santangelo, T. (2014). Does spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? A meta-analytic review. Reading and Writing, 27(9), 1703–1743. doi:10.1007/s11145-014-9517-0
   Google Scholar
• Grainger, J., & Ferrand, L. (1994). Phonology and orthography in visual word recognition: Effects of masked homophone primes. Journal of Memory and Language, 33(2), 218–233. doi:10.1006/jmla.1994.1011
   Google Scholar
• Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review, 103(3), 518–565. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.103.3.518
   Google Scholar
• Grainger, J., & Ziegler, J. (2008). Cross-code consistency in a functionlal architecture for word recognition. In E. L. Brogorenko & A. J. Naples (Eds.), Single word reading: Behavioral and biological perspectives (pp. 129–157). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: John Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Harm, M. W., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 111(3), 662–720. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.111.3.662
   Google Scholar
• Hart, L., & Perfetti, C. A. (2008). Learning words in Zekkish: Implications for understanding lexical representation. Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Hersch, J., & Andrews, S. (2012). Lexical quality and reading skill: Bottom-up and top-down contributions to sentence processing. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16(3), 240–262. doi:10.1080/10888438.2011.564244
   Google Scholar
• Hino, Y., Kusunose, Y., Lupker, S. J., & Jared, D. (2013). The processing advantage and disadvantage for homophones in lexical decision tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(2), 529–551. doi:10.1037/a0029122
   Google Scholar
• Holmes, V. M. (1996). Skilled reading and orthographic processing. Australian Journal of Psychology, 48, 149–154. doi:10.1080/00049539608259522
   Google Scholar
• Jared, D., Levy, B. A., & Rayner, K. (1999). The role of phonology in the activation of word meanings during reading: Evidence from proofreading and eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128(3), 219–264. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.128.3.219
   Google Scholar
• Jared, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1991). Does word identification proceed from spelling to sound to meaning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 358–394. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.120.4.358
   Google Scholar
• Kerswell, L., Siakaluk, P. D., Pexman, P. M., Sears, C. R., & Owen, W. J. (2007). Homophone effects in visual word recognition depend on homophone type and task demands. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 61(4), 322–327. doi: 10.1037/cjep2007032
   Google Scholar
• Kilgarriff, A. (1995, November 3, 1998). BNC database and word frequency lists. Retrieved December 5, 2000, from http://www.kilgarriff.co.uk/bnc-readme.html
   Google Scholar
• Kim, J., Taft, M., & Davis, C. (2004). Orthographic-phonological links in the lexicon: When lexical and sublexical information conflict. Reading and Writing, 17(1–2), 187–218. doi:10.1023/B:READ.0000013805.77364.cd
   Google Scholar
• Lewellen, M. J., Goldinger, S. D., Pisoni, D. B., & Greene, B. G. (1993). Lexical familiarity and processing efficiency: Individual differences in naming, lexical decision, and semantic categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(3), 316–330. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.122.3.316
   Google Scholar
• Lundberg, I., Frost, J., & Peterson, O.-P. (1988). Effects of an extensive program for stimulating phonological awareness in preschool children. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 263–284. doi:10.1598/RRQ.23.3.1
   Google Scholar
• Macmillan, N. A., & Creelman, C. D. (2005). Detection theory: A user's guide. Mhawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Manis, F. R., Seidenberg, M. S., Doi, L. M., McBride Chang, C., & Petersen, A. (1996). On the bases of two subtypes of development dyslexia. Cognition, 58(2), 157–195. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(95)00679-6
   Google Scholar
• Newman, R. L., Jared, D., & Haigh, C. A. (2012). Does phonology play a role when skilled readers read high-frequency words? Evidence from ERPs. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27(9), 1361–1384. doi:10.1080/01690965.2011.603932
   Google Scholar
• Norris, D. (2006). The Bayesian reader: Explaining word recognition as an optimal Bayesian decision process. Psychological Review, 113(2), 327–357. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.113.2.327
   Google Scholar
• Ouellette, G. (2010). Orthographic learning in learning to spell: The roles of semantics and type of practice. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 107(1), 50–58. doi:10.1075/wll.8.2.04nel
   Google Scholar
• Perfetti, C. A. (1992). The representation problem in reading acquisition. In P. Gough, L. Ehri & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 145–174). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Perfetti, C. A. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 357–383. doi:10.1080/10888430701530730
   Google Scholar
• Perfetti, C. A., Beck, I., Bell, L., & Hughes, C. (1987). Phonemic knowledge and learning to read are reciprocal: A longitudinal study of first grade children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 33, 283–319.
   Google Scholar
• Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2001). The lexical basis of comprehension skill. In D. S. Gorfein (Ed.), On the consequences of meaning selection: Perspectives on resolving lexical ambiguity. (pp. 67–87). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2002). The lexical quality hypothesis. In L. T. Verhoeven, C. Elbro, & P. Reitsma, (Eds.), Precursors of functional literacy (pp. 189–213). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: J. Benjamins Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Pexman, P. M., Lupker, S. J., & Jared, D. (2001). Homophone effects in lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(1), 139–156.
   Google Scholar
• Pexman, P. M., Lupker, S. J., & Reggin, L. D. (2002). Phonological effects in visual word recognition: Investigating the impact of feedback activation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(3), 572–584. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.28.3.572
   Google Scholar
• R Development Core Team. (2011). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org
   Google Scholar
• Rastle, K., & Brysbaert, M. (2006). Masked phonological priming effects in English: Are they real? Do they matter? Cognitive Psychology, 53(2), 97–145. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.01.002
   Google Scholar
• Rueckl, J. G., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2009). Computational modeling and the neural bases of reading and reading disorders. In K. P. P. McCardle (Ed.), How children learn to read: Current issues and new directions in the integration of cognition, neurobiology and genetics of reading and dyslexia research and practice (pp. 101–133). New York, NY, US: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolutto, A. (2002). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
   Google Scholar
• Sears, C. R., Siakaluk, P. D., Chow, V. C., & Buchanan, L. (2008). Is there an effect of print exposure on the word frequency effect and the neighborhood size effect? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 37(4), 269–291. doi: 10.1007/s10936-008-9071-5
   Google Scholar
• Shahar-Yames, D., & Share, D. L. (2008). Spelling as a self-teaching mechanism in orthographic learning. Journal of Research in Reading, 31(1), 22–39. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2007.00359.x
   Google Scholar
• Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55(2), 151–218. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(94)00645-2
   Google Scholar
• Stanislaw, H., & Todorov, N. (1999). Calculation of signal detection theory measures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 31(1), 137–149. doi:10.3758/BF03207704
   Google Scholar
• Stanovich, K. E., & Cunningham, A. E. (1992). Studying the consequences of literacy within a literate society: The cognitive correlates of print exposure. Memory and Cognition, 20, 51–68. doi: 10.3758/BF03208254
   Google Scholar
• Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24(4), 402–433. doi:10.2307/747605
   Google Scholar
• Taft, M. (1984). Evidence for an abstract lexical representation of word structure. Memory & Cognition, 12(3), 264–269. doi:10.3758/BF03197674
   Google Scholar
• Unsworth, S. J., & Pexman, P. M. (2003). The impact of reader skill on phonological processing in visual word recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology Section A, 56, 63–81. doi: 10.1080/02724980244000206
   Google Scholar
• Van Orden, G. C. (1987). A ROWS is a ROSE: Spelling, sound, and reading. Memory & Cognition, 15(3), 181–198. doi:10.3758/BF03197716
   Google Scholar
• Vellutino, F. R. (1994). The increasingly inextricable relationship between orthographic and phonological coding in learning to read: Some reservations about current methods of operationalizing orthographic coding. In V. W. Berninger (Ed.), The varieties of orthographic knowledge, 2: Relationships to phonology, reading, and writing (pp. 47–111). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, G. S. (1993). The wide range achievement test administration manual. Wilmington, DE: Wide Range.
   Google Scholar