Processing of Syllables in Production and Recognition Tasks

Overview

Journal J Psycholinguist Res

Publisher Springer

Specialty Psychology

Date 2007 Jan 30

PMID 17260187

Citations 3

Authors

Prisca Stenneken

Markus Conrad

Arthur Jacobs

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Empirical evidence for a functional role of syllables in visual word processing is abundant, however it remains rather heterogeneous. The present study aims to further specify the role of syllables and the cognitive accessibility of syllabic information in word processing. The first experiment compared performance across naming and lexical decision tasks by manipulating the number of syllables in words and non-words. Results showed a syllable number effect in both the naming task and the lexical decision task. The second experiment introduced a stimulus set consisting of isolated syllabic and non-syllabic trigrams. Syllable frequency was manipulated in a naming and in a decision task requiring participants to decide on the syllabic status of letter strings. Results showed faster responses for syllables than for non-syllables in both tasks. Syllable frequency effects were observed in the decision task. In summary, the results from these manipulations of different types of syllable information confirm an important role of syllabic units in both recognition and production.

Citing Articles

The role of syllables and morphemes in silent reading: An eye-tracking study.

De Simone E, Moll K, Feldmann L, Schmalz X, Beyersmann E Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2023; 76(11):2493-2513.

PMID: 36803303 PMC: 10585950. DOI: 10.1177/17470218231160638.

The syllable effect in anagram solution: unrecognised evidence from past studies.

Muncer S, Knight D J Psycholinguist Res. 2010; 40(2):111-8.

PMID: 20941543 DOI: 10.1007/s10936-010-9159-6.

InfoSyll: a syllabary providing statistical information on phonological and orthographic syllables.

Chetail F, Mathey S J Psycholinguist Res. 2009; 39(6):485-504.

PMID: 20037781 DOI: 10.1007/s10936-009-9146-y.

References

Levelt W, Wheeldon L . Do speakers have access to a mental syllabary?. Cognition. 1994; 50(1-3):239-69. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90030-2. View

Schiller N . Single word production in english: the role of subsyllabic units during phonological encoding. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2000; 26(2):512-28. DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.26.2.512. View

Cholin J, Levelt W, Schiller N . Effects of syllable frequency in speech production. Cognition. 2005; 99(2):205-35. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.01.009. View

Ferrand L, New B . Syllabic length effects in visual word recognition and naming. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2003; 113(2):167-83. DOI: 10.1016/s0001-6918(03)00031-3. View

Hutzler F, Conrad M, Jacobs A . Effects of syllable-frequency in lexical decision and naming: an eye-movement study. Brain Lang. 2005; 92(2):138-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2004.06.001. View

Lee C . Absence of syllable effects: multisyllabic [correction of monosyllabic] words are easier than monosyllabic [correction of multisyllabic] words. Percept Mot Skills. 2001; 93(1):73-7. DOI: 10.2466/pms.2001.93.1.73. View

Massaro D, COHEN M . Visual, orthographic, phonological, and lexical influences in reading. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1994; 20(6):1107-28. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.20.6.1107. View

Hofmann M, Stenneken P, Conrad M, Jacobs A . Sublexical frequency measures for orthographic and phonological units in German. Behav Res Methods. 2007; 39(3):620-9. DOI: 10.3758/bf03193034. View

Rey A, Ziegler J, Jacobs A . Graphemes are perceptual reading units. Cognition. 2000; 75(1):B1-12. DOI: 10.1016/s0010-0277(99)00078-5. View

10.

Stenneken P, Conrad M, Hutzler F, Braun M, Jacobs A . Frequency effects with visual words and syllables in a dyslexic reader. Behav Neurol. 2006; 16(2-3):103-17. PMC: 5478835. DOI: 10.1155/2005/427605. View

11.

Barber H, Vergara M, Carreiras M . Syllable-frequency effects in visual word recognition: evidence from ERPs. Neuroreport. 2004; 15(3):545-8. DOI: 10.1097/00001756-200403010-00032. View

12.

Jacobs A, Graf R, Kinder A . Receiver operating characteristics in the lexical decision task: evidence for a simple signal-detection process simulated by the multiple read-out model. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2003; 29(3):481-8. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.29.3.481. View

13.

Hutzler F, Bergmann J, Conrad M, Kronbichler M, Stenneken P, Jacobs A . Inhibitory effects of first syllable-frequency in lexical decision: an event-related potential study. Neurosci Lett. 2004; 372(3):179-84. DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2004.07.050. View

14.

Aichert I, Ziegler W . Syllable frequency and syllable structure in apraxia of speech. Brain Lang. 2003; 88(1):148-59. DOI: 10.1016/s0093-934x(03)00296-7. View

15.

Kwantes P, Mewhort D . Modeling lexical decision and word naming as a retrieval process. Can J Exp Psychol. 2000; 53(4):306-15. DOI: 10.1037/h0087318. View

16.

Ziegler W . A nonlinear model of word length effects in apraxia of speech. Cogn Neuropsychol. 2010; 22(5):603-23. DOI: 10.1080/02643290442000211. View

17.

Ans B, Carbonnel S, Valdois S . A connectionist multiple-trace memory model for polysyllabic word reading. Psychol Rev. 1998; 105(4):678-723. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.105.4.678-723. View

18.

Coltheart M, Rastle K, Perry C, Langdon R, Ziegler J . DRC: a dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychol Rev. 2001; 108(1):204-56. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.108.1.204. View

19.

Carreiras M, Perea M . Naming pseudowords in Spanish: effects of syllable frequency. Brain Lang. 2004; 90(1-3):393-400. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2003.12.003. View

20.

Klapp S . Implicit speech inferred from response latencies in same-different decisions. J Exp Psychol. 1971; 91(2):262-7. DOI: 10.1037/h0031852. View