SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Adams, M. J. (1981). What good is orthographic redundancy? In O. J. L. Tzeng & H. Singer (Eds.), Perception of print: Reading research in experimental psychology (pp. 197221). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Anderson, J. R., Bothell, D., Douglass, S., Lebiere, C., & Qin, Y. (2004). An integrated theory of the mind. Psychological Review, 111, 10361060.
  • Ans, B., Carbonnel, S., & Valdois, S. (1998). A connectionist multiple-trace memory model for polysyllabic word reading. Psychological Review, 105, 678723.
  • Arciuli, J., & Cupples, L. (2006). The processing of lexical stress in word recognition: Typicality effects and orthographic correlates. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 920948.
  • Baayen, R. H., Milin, P., Ðurđević, D. F., Hendrix, P., & Marelli, M. (2011). An amorphous model for morphological processing in visual comprehension based on naive discriminative learning. Psychological Review, 118, 438481.
  • Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & van Rijn, H. (1993). The CELEX lexical database (CD-ROM): Linguistic data consortium. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania.
  • Balota, D. A., & Spieler, D. (1998). The utility of item-level analysis in model evaluation: A reply to Seidenberg and Plaut. Psychological Science, 9, 238240.
    Direct Link:
  • Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., Neely, J. H., Nelson, D. L., Simpson, G. B & Treiman, R. (2007). The English lexicon project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445459.
  • Bartlett, S., Kondrak, G., & Cherry, C. (2008). Automatic syllabification with structured SVMs for letter-to-phoneme conversion. In K. McKeown, J. D. Moore, S. Teufel, J. Allan & S. Furui (Eds), Proceedings of ACL-08: HLT (pp. 568576). Columbus, OH: Association for Computational Linguistics.
  • Caramazza, A., & Miceli, G. (1990). The structure of graphemic representations. Cognition, 37, 243297.
  • Cassar, M., & Treiman, R. (1997). The beginnings of orthographic knowledge: Children's knowledge of double letters in words. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 631644.
  • Chateau, D., & Jared, D. (2003). Spelling-sound consistency effects in disyllabic word naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 255280.
  • Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. C. (2001). DRC: A computational model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204256.
  • Cotelli, M., Abutalebi, J., Zorzi, M., & Cappa, S. F. (2003). Vowels in the buffer: A case study of acquired dysgraphia with selective vowel substitutions. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 99114.
  • Davis, C. J., & Bowers, J. S. (2006). Contrasting five different theories of letter position coding: Evidence from orthographic similarity effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 535557.
  • Diependaele, K., Ziegler, J. C., & Grainger, J. (2010). Fast phonology and the bimodal interactive activation mode. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22, 764788.
  • Farah, M. J., & McClelland, J. (1991). A computational model of semantic memory impairment: Modality specificity and emergent category specificity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 339357.
  • Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 116124.
  • Gluck, M. A., & Bower, G. H. (1988). From conditioning to category learning: An adaptive network model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 227247.
  • Gomez, P., Ratcliff, R., & Perea, M. (2008). The overlap model: A model of letter position coding. Psychological Review, 115, 577600.
  • Goswami, U., & Ziegler, J. C. (2006). A developmental perspective on the neural code for written words. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 142143.
  • Hall, T. A. (2006). English syllabification as the interaction of markedness constraints. Studia Linguistica, 60, 133.
  • Hammond, M. (1999). The phonology of English. A prosodic optimality-theoretic approach. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
  • Harm, W. M., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 111, 662720.
  • Houghton, G., & Zorzi, M. (2003). Normal and impaired spelling in a connectionist dual-route architecture. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 115162.
  • Hutzler, F., Ziegler, J. C., Perry, C., Wimmer, H., & Zorzi, M. (2004). Do current connectionist learning models account for reading development in different languages? Cognition, 91, 273296.
  • Jordan, M. I. (1986). Attractor dynamics and parallelism in a connectionist sequential machine. In Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 531546). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Kello, C. T. (2006). Considering the junction model of lexical processing. In S. Andrews (Ed.), From inkmarks to ideas: Current issues in lexical processing (pp. 5075). New York: Taylor and Francis.
  • Kelly, M. H. (2004). Word onset patterns and lexical stress in English. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 231244.
  • Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 175.
  • Lupker, S. J., Acham, A., Davis, C. J., & Perea, M. (2012). An investigation of the role of grapheme units in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1, 126.
  • MacKay, D. (1971). The structure of words and syllables: Evidence from errors in speech. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 210227.
  • Marchand, Y., Adsett, C. R., & Damper, R. I. (2009). Automatic syllabification in English: A comparison of different algorithms. Language and Speech, 52, 127.
  • McClelland, J. (2009). The place of modelling in cognitive science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1, 1138.
  • Munakata, Y. (1998). Infant perseveration and implications for object permanence theories: A PDP model of the ABimage_n/cogs12030-gra-0001.png task. Developmental Science, 1(2), 161211.
  • Pacton, S., Perruchet, P., Fayol, M., & Cleeremens, A. (2001). Implicit learning out of the lab: The case of orthographic regularities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 401426.
  • Pagliuca, G., & Monaghan, P. (2010). Discovering large grain sizes in a transparent orthography: Insights from a connectionist model of Italian word naming. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22, 813835.
  • Perea, M., & Lupker, S. J. (2004). Can CANISO activate CASINO? Transposed-letter similarity effects with nonadjacent letter positions. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 231246.
  • Perry, C. (in press). Graphemic parsing and the basic orthographic syllable structure. Language and Cognitive Processes. DOI:10.1080/01690965.2011.641386
  • Perry, C., & Jie, Z. (2005). Prosody and lemma selection. Memory & Cognition, 33, 862870.
  • Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., Braun, M., & Zorzi, M. (2010). Rules versus statistics in reading aloud: New evidence on an old debate. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 5, 798812.
  • Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Coltheart, M. (2002). How predictable is spelling? An analysis of sound-spelling contingency in English. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. A, Human Experimental Psychology, 55A, 897915.
  • Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2007). Nested modeling and strong inference resting in the development of computational theories: The CDP+ model of reading aloud. Psychological Review, 27, 301333.
  • Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2010). Beyond single syllables: Large-scale modeling of reading aloud with the Connectionist Dual Process (CDP++) model. Cognitive Psychology, 61, 106151.
  • Pinker, S., & Prince, A. (1988). On language and connectionism: Analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of language acquisition. Cognition, 28, 73193.
  • Plaut, D. C. (1999). A connectionist approach to word reading and acquired dyslexia: Extension to sequential processing. Cognitive Science, 23, 543568.
  • Plaut, D. C., McClelland, J. L., Seidenberg, M. S., & Patterson, K. (1996). Understanding normal and impaired word reading: Computational principles in quasi-regular domains. Psychological Review, 103, 56115.
  • Primary Framework for Literacy and Mathematics (2006). Primary Framework for literacy and mathematics. Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100202100434/nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/node/84445. Accessed February 17, 2013.
  • Rastle, K., & Coltheart, M. (2000). Lexical and nonlexical print-to-sound translation of disyllabic words and nonwords. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 342364.
  • Rey, A., Ziegler, J. C., & Jacobs, A. M. (2000). Graphemes are perceptual reading units. Cognition, 75, B1B12.
  • Rumelhart, D. A., & McClelland, J. (1986). On learning the past tenses of English verbs. In J. L. McClelland, D. E. Rumelhart, & T. P. R. Group (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Volume 2: Psychological and biological models (pp. 216271). Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books/MIT Press.
  • Scragg, D. G. (1974). A history of English spelling. Manchester, England: Manchester University Press.
  • Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96, 523568.
  • Seidenberg, M. S., & Waters, G. S. (1989). Word recognition and naming: A mega study [Abstract]. Paper presented at the Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society.
  • Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151218.
  • Spieler, D. H., & Balota, D. (1997). Bringing computational models of word naming down to the item level. Psychological Science, 8, 411416.
    Direct Link:
  • Spinelli, E., Kandel, S., Guerassimovitch, H., & Ferrand, L. (2012). Graphemic cohesion effect in reading and writing complex graphemes. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 770791.
  • Stoianov, I., & Zorzi, M. (2012). Emergence of a “Visual number sense” in hierarchical generative models. Nature Neuroscience, 15, 194196.
  • Sutton, R. S., & Barto, A. G. (1981). Toward a modern theory of adaptive networks: Expectation and prediction. Psychological Review, 88, 135170.
  • Taft, M. (1979). Lexical access via an orthographic code: The Basic Orthographic Syllable Structure (BOSS). Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 2139.
  • Taft, M. (1991). Reading and the mental lexicon. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Taft, M. (1992). The body of the BOSS: Sub-syllabic units in the lexical processing of polysyllabic words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 10041014.
  • Taft, M. (2001). Processing of orthographic structure by adults of different reading ability. Language and Speech, 44, 351376.
  • Tainturier, M.-J., & Caramazza, A. (1996). Double letters in graphemic representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 5373.
  • Tainturier, M. J., & Rapp, B. C. (2004). Complex graphemes as functional spelling units: Evidence from acquired dysgraphia. Neurocase, 10, 122131.
  • Treiman, R., Mullennix, J., Bijeljac-Babic, R., & Richmond-Welty, E. D. (1995). The special role of rimes in the description, use, and acquisition of English orthography. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 107136.
  • Venezky, R. L. (1967). English orthography: It's graphical structure and its relation to sound. Reading Research Quarterly, 2, 75105.
  • Venezky, R. L., & Massaro, D. W. (1987). Orthographic structure and spelling–sound regularity in reading English words. In A. Allport, D. G. Mackay, W. Prinz, & E. Scheerer (Eds.), Language perception and production: Relationships between listening, speaking, reading and writing (pp. 159181). Florida: Academic Press.
  • Waese, M., & Jared, D. (2006). The role of intervocalic consonants in disyllabic word naming. Paper presented at the 47th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Houston: Texas.
  • Widrow, G., & Hoff, M. E. (1960). Adaptive switching circuits. In In Institute of Radio Engineers, Western Electronic Show and Convention Record, Part 4 (pp. 96104). New York: Institute of Radio Engineers.
  • Yap, M. J., & Balota, D. A. (2009). Visual word recognition of multisyllabic words. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 502529.
  • Ziegler, J. C., Castel, C., Pech-Georgel, C., George, F., Alario, F.-X., & Perry, C. (2008). Developmental dyslexia and the dual route model of Reading: Simulating individual differences and subtypes. Cognition, 107, 151178.
  • Zorzi, M. (2010). The connectionist dual process (CDP) approach to modelling reading aloud. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22, 836860.
  • Zorzi, M., Houghton, G., & Butterworth, B. (1998a). Two routes or one in reading aloud? A connectionist dual-process model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 11311161.
  • Zorzi, M., Houghton, G., & Butterworth, B. (1998b). The development of spelling-sound relationships in a model of phonological reading. Language and Cognitive Processes, 13, 337371.