An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 2. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model.

The interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception is reviewed, elaborated, and tested. According to the model context aids the perception of target letters as they are processed in the perceptual system. The implication that the duration and timing of the context in which a letter occurs should greatly influence the perceptibility of the target is confirmed by a series of experiments demonstrating that early or enhanced presentations of word and pronounceablepseudoword contexts greatly increase the perceptibility of target letters. Also according to the model, letters in strings that share several letters with words should be equally perceptible whether they are orthographically regular and pronounceable (SLET) or irregular (SLNT) and should be much more perceptible than letters in contexts that share few letters with any word (XLQJ). This prediction is tested and confirmed. The basic results of all the experiments are accounted for, with some modification of parameters, although there are some discrepancies in detail. Several recent findings that seem to challenge the model are considered and a number of extensions are proposed.

[1]  E. Tulving,et al.  STIMULUS INFORMATION AND CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION AS DETERMINANTS OF TACHISTOSCOPIC RECOGNITION OF WORDS. , 1963, Journal of experimental psychology.

[2]  E. Tulving.  Familiarity of letter-sequences and tachistoscopic identification. , 1963, The American journal of psychology.

[3]  G. Mandler,et al.  INTERACTION OF TWO SOURCES OF INFORMATION IN TACHISTOSCOPIC WORD RECOGNITION. , 1964, Canadian journal of psychology.

[4]  H. Kucera,et al.  Computational analysis of present-day American English , 1967 .

[5]  G. M. Reicher.  Perceptual recognition as a function of meaninfulness of stimulus material. , 1969, Journal of experimental psychology.

[6]  John J. L. Morton,et al.  Interaction of information in word recognition. , 1969 .

[7]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Visual masking in multielement displays. , 1970, Journal of experimental psychology.

[8]  R. M. Warren.  Perceptual Restoration of Missing Speech Sounds , 1970, Science.

[9]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  Expectancy as a determinant of functional units in perceptual recognition , 1971 .

[10]  R. M. Warren,et al.  Speech perception and phonemic restorations , 1971 .

[11]  R. Cole.  Listening for mispronunciations: A measure of what we hear during speech , 1973 .

[12]  D. Rumelhart,et al.  Process of recognizing tachistoscopically presented words. , 1974, Psychological review.

[13]  M. Mason.  Reading Ability and Letter Search Time: Effects of Orthographic Structure Defined by Single-Letter Positional Frequency. , 1975 .

[14]  K. T. Spoehr,et al.  The role of orthographic and phonotactic rules in perceiving letter patterns. , 1975, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  Alan S. Brown,et al.  Information Processing and Cognition: The Loyola Symposium , 1976 .

[16]  J. L. Mcclelland.  Preliminary letter identification in the perception of words and nonwords. , 1976, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[17]  W. Estes,et al.  Serial position functions for letter identification at brief and extended exposure durations , 1976 .

[18]  N. Lass.  Contemporary Issues in Experimental Phonetics , 1976 .

[19]  James L. McClelland,et al.  The role of familiar units in perception of words and nonwords , 1977 .

[20]  Geoffrey E. Hinton.  Relaxation and its role in vision , 1977 .

[21]  William D Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Processing interactions and lexical access during word recognition in continuous speech , 1978, Cognitive Psychology.

[22]  B. Bergum,et al.  Attention and Performance VI , 1978 .

[23]  James C Johnston,et al.  A test of the Sophisticated Guessing Theory of word perception , 1978, Cognitive Psychology.

[24]  T. Carr,et al.  Perceptual flexibility in word recognition: strategies affect orthographic computation but not lexical access. , 1978, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[25]  James L. McClelland.  On the time relations of mental processes: An examination of systems of processes in cascade. , 1979 .

[26]  D W Massaro,et al.  Orthographic regularity, positional frequency, and visual processing of letter strings. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[27]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Experimental tests of a hierarchical model of word identification , 1980 .

[28]  S. Grossberg,et al.  How does a brain build a cognitive code? , 1980, Psychological review.

[29]  Donald J. Foss,et al.  Identifying the speech codes , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[30]  S. Grossberg.  How does a brain build a cognitive code , 1980 .

[31]  David E. Rumelhart,et al.  An Interactive Activation Model of the Effect of Context in Perception. Part 2 , 1980 .

[32]  Geoffrey E. Hinton.  A Parallel Computation that Assigns Canonical Object-Based Frames of Reference , 1981, IJCAI.

[33]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. , 1981 .