• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在有或无前词汇判断的情况下,词频和拼写-发音规则性对命名的影响。

Effects of word frequency and spelling-to-sound regularity in naming with and without preceding lexical decision.

作者信息

Hino Y, Lupker S J

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Chukyo University, Nagoya, Japan.

出版信息

J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2000 Feb;26(1):166-83. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.26.1.166.

DOI:10.1037//0096-1523.26.1.166
PMID:10696612
Abstract

The effects of word frequency and spelling-to-sound regularity were examined using standard naming, standard lexical-decision, go/no-go naming, and go/no-go lexical-decision tasks. In both the standard and go/no-go naming tasks, tasks requiring phonological coding, a significant Frequency x Regularity interaction was observed. That is, the regularity effect was limited to low-frequency words. In the standard and go/no-go lexical-decision tasks, tasks not requiring phonological coding, no Frequency x Regularity interaction was observed. These results indicate not only that the Frequency x Regularity interaction is a product of phonological coding processes but also that these processes are similar in the standard and go/no-go naming tasks. Results are discussed in terms of the dual-route and the parallel distributed processing frameworks.

摘要

使用标准命名、标准词汇判断、go/no-go命名和go/no-go词汇判断任务来考察词频和拼写-发音规则性的影响。在标准和go/no-go命名任务中,即需要语音编码的任务中,观察到了显著的频率×规则性交互作用。也就是说,规则性效应仅限于低频词。在标准和go/no-go词汇判断任务中,即不需要语音编码的任务中,未观察到频率×规则性交互作用。这些结果不仅表明频率×规则性交互作用是语音编码过程的产物,还表明这些过程在标准和go/no-go命名任务中是相似的。根据双通道和并行分布式处理框架对结果进行了讨论。

相似文献

1
Effects of word frequency and spelling-to-sound regularity in naming with and without preceding lexical decision.在有或无前词汇判断的情况下,词频和拼写-发音规则性对命名的影响。
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2000 Feb;26(1):166-83. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.26.1.166.
2
Spelling-sound regularity effects on eye fixations in reading.拼写-发音规律对阅读中眼动注视的影响。
Percept Psychophys. 2000 Feb;62(2):402-9. doi: 10.3758/bf03205559.
3
Evidence for the modulation of sub-lexical processing in go no-go naming: the elimination of the frequency × regularity interaction.在go no-go命名任务中对次词汇加工进行调制的证据:频率×规则性交互作用的消除。
J Psycholinguist Res. 2011 Dec;40(5-6):367-78. doi: 10.1007/s10936-011-9174-2.
4
The impact of sonority on onset-rime and peak-coda lexical decision and naming of lexical items by children with different spelling ability.响亮度对不同拼写能力儿童的首音-韵脚和音峰-韵尾词汇判断及词汇项命名的影响。
J Psycholinguist Res. 2008 Mar;37(2):125-39. doi: 10.1007/s10936-007-9063-x.
5
Behavioral and neurobiological effects of printed word repetition in lexical decision and naming.词汇判断和命名中印刷单词重复的行为学和神经生物学效应
Neuropsychologia. 2005;43(14):2068-83. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.03.022. Epub 2005 Apr 22.
6
New evidence for phonological processing during visual word recognition: the case of Arabic.视觉单词识别过程中语音加工的新证据:以阿拉伯语为例。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1996 Mar;22(2):309-23. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.22.2.309.
7
Interactions of age of acquisition and lexical frequency effects with phonological regularity: An ERP study.获得年龄和词汇频率效应与语音规则的相互作用:一项 ERP 研究。
Psychophysiology. 2019 Oct;56(10):e13433. doi: 10.1111/psyp.13433. Epub 2019 Jul 2.
8
Comparing naming, lexical decision, and eye fixation times: word frequency effects and individual differences.比较命名、词汇判断和眼动注视时间:词频效应与个体差异。
Mem Cognit. 1998 Nov;26(6):1270-81. doi: 10.3758/bf03201199.
9
Phonological decoding or direct access? Regularity effects in lexical decisions of Grade 3 and 4 children.语音解码还是直接通达?三年级和四年级儿童词汇判断中的规则性效应。
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2013;66(2):338-46. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2012.711843. Epub 2012 Aug 21.
10
Homophone effects in lexical decision.词汇判断中的同音词效应。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2001 Jan;27(1):139-56.

引用本文的文献

1
Advantage of the go/no-go task over the yes/no lexical decision task: ERP indexes of parameters in the diffusion model.Go/No-go 任务优于是/否词汇判断任务:扩散模型中的参数 ERP 指标。
PLoS One. 2019 Jul 1;14(7):e0218451. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218451. eCollection 2019.
2
"To Name or Not to Name: That is the Question": The Role of Response Inhibition in Reading.“命名与否:这是个问题”:反应抑制在阅读中的作用
J Psycholinguist Res. 2018 Oct;47(5):999-1014. doi: 10.1007/s10936-018-9572-9.
3
Feature Statistics Modulate the Activation of Meaning During Spoken Word Processing.
特征统计在口语单词处理过程中调节语义激活。
Cogn Sci. 2016 Mar;40(2):325-50. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12234. Epub 2015 Jun 4.
4
Reconsidering the role of orthographic redundancy in visual word recognition.重新审视正字冗余在视觉单词识别中的作用。
Front Psychol. 2015 May 18;6:645. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00645. eCollection 2015.
5
Getting to the bottom of orthographic depth.深入探究正字法深度。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2015 Dec;22(6):1614-29. doi: 10.3758/s13423-015-0835-2.
6
Opposing effects of semantic diversity in lexical and semantic relatedness decisions.词汇和语义相关性判断中语义多样性的相反作用。
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2015 Apr;41(2):385-402. doi: 10.1037/a0038995. Epub 2015 Mar 9.
7
Anatomy is strategy: skilled reading differences associated with structural connectivity differences in the reading network.解剖结构即策略:与阅读网络中结构连通性差异相关的熟练阅读差异
Brain Lang. 2014 Jun;133:1-13. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2014.03.005. Epub 2014 Apr 16.
8
The cognitive chronometric architecture of reading aloud: semantic and lexical effects on naming onset and duration.朗读的认知计时架构:命名起始和持续时间的语义和词汇效应。
Front Hum Neurosci. 2012 Oct 19;6:287. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00287. eCollection 2012.
9
An abundance of riches: cross-task comparisons of semantic richness effects in visual word recognition.丰富的资源:视觉单词识别中语义丰富性效应的跨任务比较
Front Hum Neurosci. 2012 Apr 17;6:72. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00072. eCollection 2012.
10
Evidence for the modulation of sub-lexical processing in go no-go naming: the elimination of the frequency × regularity interaction.在go no-go命名任务中对次词汇加工进行调制的证据:频率×规则性交互作用的消除。
J Psycholinguist Res. 2011 Dec;40(5-6):367-78. doi: 10.1007/s10936-011-9174-2.