Letter migration in word perception.

These experiments demonstrate that the perception of two distinct words in a briefLy presented display can interact, causing perceptual migrations of letters from one word to the other. For example, when LINE and LACE are presented, subjects might report seeing LICE or LANE instead of LINE. Several properties of the letter migrations were revealed: (a) Migrations are more frequent when the words are separated by smaller physical distances; (b) a majority of the migrations are a result of letters being copied from one word to the other, not from the interchange of letters of the two words; (c) migrations to a word are less frequent when subjects focus attention on that word; and (d) migrations are far more frequent when the words share letters in common. This last result suggests that migrations are not caused by a loss of spatial information at the letter level, that is, by free-floating letters being wrongly combined. Rather, migrations occur because of structural limitations at a high level of the word-recognition process, perhaps during lexical activation. Implications for models of multiple-word perception are discussed.

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

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

[3]  D. G. MacKay.  Spoonerisms: the structure of errors in the serial order of speech. , 1970, Neuropsychologia.

[4]  H. H. Clark.  The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research. , 1973 .

[5]  S. Jay Samuels,et al.  Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading , 1974 .

[6]  J L Bradshaw,et al.  Peripherally presented and unreported words may bias the perceived meaning of a centrally fixated homograph. , 1974, Journal of experimental psychology.

[7]  W. Estes.  The Locus of Inferential and Perceptual Processes in Letter Identification. , 1975 .

[8]  M. Posner,et al.  Attention and cognitive control. , 1975 .

[9]  Bernard J. Baars,et al.  Spoonerisms as Sequencer Conflicts: Evidence from Artifically Elicited Errors. , 1976 .

[10]  Tim Shallice,et al.  The possible role of selective attention in acquired dyslexia , 1977, Neuropsychologia.

[11]  G. McConkie,et al.  Eye movements and integrating information across fixations. , 1978, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  George W. McConkie,et al.  On the Role and Control of Eye Movements in Reading , 1979 .

[13]  Marilyn Jager Adams,et al.  Models of word recognition , 1979, Cognitive Psychology.

[14]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[15]  K. Rayner,et al.  Asymmetry of the effective visual field in reading , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  G. McConkie,et al.  Integrating information across eye movements , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

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

[18]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 2. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model. , 1982, Psychological review.

[19]  A. Treisman,et al.  Illusory conjunctions in the perception of objects , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[20]  J. H. Bertera,et al.  The availability of useful information to the right of fixation in reading , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.