Abstract
The visual world is replete with noisy, continuous, perceptually variant linguistic information, which fluent readers rapidly translate from percept to meaning. What are the properties the language comprehension system uses as cues to initiate lexical/semantic access in response to some, but not all, orthographic strings? In the behavioral, electromagnetic, and neuropsychological literatures, orthographic regularity and familiarity have been identified as critical factors. Here, we present a study in the Reicher—Wheeler tradition that manipulates these two properties independently through the use of four stimulus categories: familiar and orthographically regular words, unfamiliar but regular pseudowords, unfamiliar illegal strings, and familiar but orthographically illegal acronyms. We find that, like letters in words and pseudowords, letters in acronyms enjoy an identification benefit relative to similarly illegal, but unfamiliar strings. This supports theories of visual word recognition in which familiarity, rather than orthographic regularity, plays a critical role in gating processing.
Article PDF
References
Baron, J., &Thurston, I. (1973). An analysis of the word-superiority effect.Cognitive Psychology,4, 207–228.
Carr, T. H., Davidson, B. J., &Hawkins, H. J. (1978). Perceptual flexibility in word recognition: Strategies affect orthographic computation but not lexical access.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,4, 674–690.
Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., &Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud.Psychological Review,108, 204–256.
Deacon, D., Dynowska, A., Ritter, W., &Grose-Fifer, J. (2004). Repetition and semantic priming of nonwords: Implications for theories of N400 and word recognition.Psychophysiology,41, 60–74.
Dennis, S. (1995). TheSydney Morning Herald word database. Retrieved October 2004 from www2.psy.uq.edu.au/CogPsych/Noetica/ OpenForumIssue4/SMH.html.
Günther, H., Gfroerer, S., &Weis, L. (1984). Inflection, frequency, and the word superiority effect.Psychological Research,46, 261–281.
Harm, M. W., &Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes.Psychological Review,111, 662–720.
Henderson, L. (1974). A word superiority effect without orthographic assistance.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,26, 301–311.
Holcomb, P. J., Grainger, J., &O’Rourke, T. (2002). An electrophysiological study of the effects of orthographic neighborhood size on printed word perception.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,14, 938–950.
Jobard, G., Crivello, F., &Tzourio-Mazoyer, N. (2003). Evaluation of the dual route theory of reading: A metanalysis of 35 neuroimaging studies.NeuroImage,20, 693–712.
Kučera, H., &Francis, W. N. (1967).Computational analysis of presentday American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
Laszlo, S., &Federmeier, K. D. (2007). Better the DVL you know: Acronyms reveal the contribution of familiarity to single word reading.Psychological Science,18, 122–126.
McClelland, J. L., &Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part I. An account of basic findings.Psychological Review,88, 375–407.
Noice, H., &Hock, H. S. (1987). A word superiority effect with nonorthographic acronyms: Testing for unitized visual codes.Perception & Psychophysics,42, 485–490.
Prinzmetal, W., &Millis-Wright, M. (1984). Cognitive and linguistic factors affect visual feature integration.Cognitive Psychology,16, 305–340.
Reicher, G. M. (1969). Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material.Journal of Experimental Psychology,81, 274–280.
Rumelhart, D. E., &McClelland, J. L. (1982). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 2. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model.Psychological Review,89, 60–94.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by NIMH Training Grant T32 MHI9554 to S.L. and NIA Grant AG26308 to K.D.F.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Laszlo, S., Federmeier, K.D. The acronym superiority effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 14, 1158–1163 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193106
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193106