Process of recognizing tachistoscopically presented words.

A model for the recognition of tachistoscopically presented words is developed. The model is a "sophisticated guessing" model which takes explicit account of the geometry of the characters which make up the words or letter strings. Explicit attempts are made to account for word frequency effects, effects due to letter transition probabilities, and effects due to physical similarity of character strings to one another. A word recognition experiment using the set of three-letter words is reported, and the model is used to make quantitative predictions of these results as well as to give a qualitative account for a number of results in the literature. Finally, it is shown that under certain simplifying assumptions this sophisticated guessing model is isomorphic with the "criterion bias" model as developed in 1967 by Broadbent. The process whereby words are recognized has long fascinated experimental psy-Several related findings have commanded the most attention. For example, more letters per unit time may be apprehended when a word is presented than when a string of unrelated letters is presented (Huey, 1908). A letter string formed by taking a word and either deleting or replacing one or two letters is often clearly perceived as that word (Pillsbury, 1897). Other things being equal, words which occur frequently in the language are more easily perceived than those which occur less frequently (Goldia-The more the statistics of letter strings approximate those of words, the better the perception of the letter strings (cf. Miller, Bruner, & Postman , 1954). The more predictable a word is within a sentence, the more easily it is Most explanations of these phenomena suggest that they all result from the fact that the subject combines internally provided information about language with externally provided information from the sensory system (cf. Morton, 1969, 1970). By this argument, words are easier to see than nonwords because we can apply our knowledge of the vocabulary of the language. Knowledge of relative frequencies of words in the language allows us to read high-frequency words more readily. Knowledge of syntactic and semantic relations allows us to read words more easily in the context of 99

[1]  W. B. Pillsbury A study in apperception , 1897 .

[2]  J. Lough,et al.  A Study in Apperception. , 1897 .

[3]  B. Erdmann,et al.  Psychologische Untersuchungen über das Lesen: Auf experimenteller Grundlage , 1899 .

[4]  E. B. Huey The Psychology And Pedagogy Of Reading , 1908 .

[5]  Margaret Floy Washburn,et al.  The Psychology And Pedagogy Of Reading , 1908 .

[6]  Sidney E. Owsowitz THE EFFECTS OF WORD FAMILIARITY AND LETTER STRUCTURE FAMILIARITY ON THE PERCEPTION OF WORDS , 1943 .

[7]  G. A. Miller,et al.  The intelligibility of speech as a function of the context of the test materials. , 1951, Journal of experimental psychology.

[8]  R. Solomon,et al.  Frequency of usage as a determinant of recognition thresholds for words. , 1952, Journal of experimental psychology.

[9]  J. Bruner,et al.  Familiarity of Letter Sequences and Tachistoscopic Identification , 1954 .

[10]  D. M. Green,et al.  The effect of vocabulary size on articulation score , 1958 .

[11]  W. F. Hawkins,et al.  Vexierversuch: the log relationship between word-frequency and recognition obtained in the absence of stimulus words. , 1958, Journal of experimental psychology.

[12]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Individual Choice Behavior , 1959 .

[13]  B. Underwood,et al.  Meaningfulness and verbal learning , 1960 .

[14]  Newbigging Pl The perceptual redintegration of frequent and infrequent words. , 1961 .

[15]  D. Hubel,et al.  Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex , 1962, The Journal of physiology.

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

[17]  M. Wiener,et al.  Personality and perception in the recognition threshold paradigm. , 1963, Psychological review.

[18]  H. Savin Word‐Frequency Effect and Errors in the Perception of Speech , 1963 .

[19]  Arthur N. Stowe,et al.  Signal and Context Components of Word‐Recognition Behavior , 1963 .

[20]  J. Swets Signal detection and recognition by human observers : contemporary readings , 1964 .

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

[22]  M. S. Mayzner,et al.  Tables of single-letter and digram frequency counts for various word-length and letter-position combinations. , 1965 .

[23]  G. Biederman,et al.  Supplementary report: The recognition of tachistoscopically presented five-letter words as a function of digram frequency. , 1966 .

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

[25]  P. Ammon The perception of grammatical relations in sentences: A methodological exploration , 1968 .

[26]  中野 真宏,et al.  "The Random House Dictionary of the English Language"に於ける新語の実例 , 1968 .

[27]  D. Broadbent,et al.  Visual perception of words differing in letter digram frequency , 1968 .

[28]  J. Morton A RETEST OF THE RESPONSE-BIAS EXPLANATION OF THE WORD-FREQUENCY EFFECT , 1968 .

[29]  J. Catlin,et al.  On the word-frequency effect. , 1969 .

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

[31]  David E. Rumelhart,et al.  A multicomponent theory of the perception of briefly exposed visual displays , 1970 .

[32]  D. Rumelhart,et al.  A system for perception and memory , 1970 .

[33]  Stuart Berg Flexner,et al.  The Random House Dictionary of the English Language and the Poetry of Tina Darragh , 2020, Dictionary Poetics.

[34]  M. Treisman On the word frequency effect: comments on the papers by J. Catlin and L. H. Nakatani. , 1971, Psychological review.

[35]  J. Frederiksen Statistical decision model for auditory word recognition. , 1971, Psychological review.