Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-g5fl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-25T18:23:34.172Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The locus of Katakana–English masked phonological priming effects*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2014

ERIKO ANDO ,
KAZUNAGA MATSUKI ,
HEATHER SHERIDAN  and
DEBRA JARED
ERIKO ANDO
Affiliation:
University of Western Ontario
KAZUNAGA MATSUKI
Affiliation:
University of Western Ontario
HEATHER SHERIDAN
Affiliation:
University of Toronto at Mississauga
DEBRA JARED*
Affiliation:
University of Western Ontario
*
Address for correspondence: Debra Jared, Department of Psychology, Social Sciences Centre, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, CanadaN6A 5C2djjared@uwo.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Japanese–English bilinguals completed a masked phonological priming study with Japanese Katakana primes and English targets. Event related potential (ERP) data were collected in addition to lexical decision responses. A cross-script phonological priming effect was observed in both measures, and the effect did not interact with frequency. In the ERP data, the phonological priming effect was evident before the frequency effect. These data, along with analyses of response latency distributions, provide evidence that the cross-script phonological priming effects were the consequence of the activation of sublexical phonological representations in a store shared by both Japanese and English. This activation fed back to sublexical and lexical orthographic representations, influencing lexical decision latencies. The implications for the Bilingual Interactive Activation (BIA+) model of word recognition are discussed.

Keywords

bilingualJapanese–Englishcross-scriptphonological primingERPlexical decision
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , January 2015 , pp. 101 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This research was supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Discovery Grant to Debra Jared and by an Academic Development Fund grant from the University of Western Ontario. The research was part of an MSc thesis by Eriko Ando. We thank Steve Lupker for comments on an earlier draft.

References

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, 445–459.Google Scholar
Barber, H., Vergara, M., & Carreiras, M. (2004). Syllable-frequency effects in visual word recognition: Evidence from ERPs. NeuroReport, 15, 545–548.Google Scholar
Braun, M., Hutzler, F., Ziegler, J. C., Dambacher, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (2008). Pseudohomophone effects provide evidence of early lexico-phonological processing in visual word recognition. Human Brain Mapping, 30, 1977–1989.Google Scholar
Carreiras, M., Perea, M., Vergara, M., & Pollatsek, A. (2009). The time course of orthography and phonology: ERP correlates of masked priming effects in Spanish. Psychophysiology, 46, 1113–1122.Google Scholar
Carreiras, M., Vergara, M., & Barber, H. (2005). Event-related potential effects of syllable processing during visual word recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 1803–1817.Google Scholar
Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. C. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204–256.Google Scholar
Davis, C. J., & Lupker, S. J. (2006). Masked inhibitory priming in English: Evidence for lexical inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 668–687.Google Scholar
Diependaele, K., Ziegler, J. C., & Grainger, J. (2010). Fast phonology and the Bimodal Interactive Activation Model. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22, 764–778.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T. (2005). Bilingual visual word recognition and lexical access. In Kroll, J. F. & de Groot, A. M. B. (eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistics approaches, pp. 179–201. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T., Hilberink-Schulpen, B., & Van Heuven, W. J. B. (2010). Repetition and masked form priming within and between languages using word and nonword neighbors. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13, 341–357.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T., & Van Heuven, W. J. B. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5, 175–197.Google Scholar
Dimitropoulou, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., & Carreiras, M. (2011). Phonology by itself: Masked phonological priming effects with and without orthographic overlap. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23, 185–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1994). An introduction to the bootstrap. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Feldman, L. B., & Turvey, M. T. (1980). Words written in Kana are named faster than the same words written in Kanji. Language and Speech, 23, 141–147.Google Scholar
Ferrand, L., & Grainger, J. (1993). The time course of orthographic and phonological code activation in the early phases of visual word recognition. Bulletin of Psychonomic Society, 31, 119–122.Google Scholar
Ferrand, L., & Grainger, J. (1994). Effects of orthography are independent of phonology in masked form priming. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47A, 365–382.Google Scholar
Forster, K. I., & Davis, C. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 680–698.Google Scholar
Gollan, T. H., Forster, K. I., & Frost, R. (1997). Translation priming with different scripts: Masked priming with cognates and noncognates in Hebrew–English bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 1122–1139.Google Scholar
Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2009). An ERP investigation of orthographic priming with relative-position and absolute-position primes. Brain Research, 1270, 45–53.Google Scholar
Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1999). Temporal integration of information in orthographic priming. Visual Cognition, 6, 461–492.Google Scholar
Grainger, J., Kiyonaga, K., & Holcomb, P. J. (2006). The time course of orthographic and phonological code activation. Psychological Science, 17, 1021–1026.Google Scholar
Haigh, C. A., & Jared, D. (2007). The activation of phonological representations by bilinguals while reading silently: Evidence from interlingual homophones. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 623–644.Google Scholar
Hauk, O., & Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Effects of word length and frequency on the human event-related potential. Clinical Neurophysiology, 115, 1090–1103.Google Scholar
Hoshino, N., Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J. (2010). An ERP investigation of masked cross-script translation priming. Brain Research, 1344, 159–172.Google Scholar
Kim, J., & Davis, C. (2003). Task effects in masked cross-script translation and phonological priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 484–499.Google Scholar
Kroll, J. F., Van Hell, J. G., Tokowicz, N., & Green, D. W. (2010). The revised hierarchical model: A critical review and assessment. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13, 373–381.Google Scholar
Kučera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, C. H., Nam, K., & Katz, L. (2005). Nonselective access of spelling-sound knowledge for Korean–English bilinguals. International Journal of Psychology, 40, 407– 415.Google Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., & Dijkstra, T. (2004). Recognizing cognates and interlingual homographs: Effects of code similarity in language specific and generalized lexical decision. Memory & Cognition, 32, 533–550.Google Scholar
Massol, S., Grainger, J., Dufau, S., & Holcomb, P. (2010). Masked priming from orthographic neighbors: An ERP investigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 162–174.Google Scholar
Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J. (2009). Language effects in second language learners and proficient bilinguals investigated with event-related potentials. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 22, 281–300.Google Scholar
Nakayama, M., Sears, C. R., Hino, Y., & Lupker, S. J. (2012). Cross-script phonological priming for Japanese–English bilinguals: Evidence for integrated phonological representations. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 1563–1583.Google Scholar
Nazzi, T., Bertoncini, J., & Mehler, J. (1998). Language discrimination by newborns: Towards an understanding of the role of rhythm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 756–766.Google Scholar
Okano, K., Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2013). An ERP investigation of visual word recognition in syllabary scripts. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 13, 390–404.Google Scholar
Perfetti, C. A., Bell, L. C., & Delaney, S. M. (1988). Automatic (prelexical) phonetic activation in silent word reading: Evidence from backward masking. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 59–70.Google Scholar
Pexman, P. M., Lupker, S. J., & Jared, D. (2001). Homophone effects in lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 139–156.Google Scholar
Rastle, K., & Brysbaert, M. (2006). Masked phonological priming effects in English: Are they real? Do they matter? Cognitive Psychology, 53, 97–145.Google Scholar
Reingold, E., Reichle, E. D., Glaholt, M. G., & Sheridan, H. (2012). Direct lexical control of eye movements in reading: Evidence from a survival analysis of fixation durations. Cognitive Psychology, 65, 177–206.Google Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccollotto, A. (2002). E-prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.Google Scholar
Sereno, S. C., Rayner, K., & Posner, M. I. (1998). Establishing a time-line of word recognition: Evidence from eye movements and event-related potentials. NeuroReport, 9, 2195–2200.Google Scholar
Sheridan, H., Rayner, K., & Reingold, E. M. (2013). Unsegmented text delays word identification: Evidence from a survival analysis of fixation durations. Visual Cognition, 21, 38–60.Google Scholar
Sheridan, H., & Reingold, E. M. (2012a). The time course of contextual influences during lexical ambiguity resolution: Evidence from distributional analyses of fixation durations. Memory & Cognition, 40, 1122–1131.Google Scholar
Sheridan, H., & Reingold, E. M. (2012b). The time course of predictability effects in reading: Evidence from a survival analysis of fixation durations. Visual Cognition, 20, 733–745.Google Scholar
Stone, G. O., Vanhoy, M., & Van Orden, G. C. (1997). Perception is a two-way street: Feedforward and feedback phonology in visual word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 337–359.Google Scholar
Timmer, K., & Schiller, N. O. (2012). The role of orthography and phonology in English: An ERP study on first and second language reading aloud. Brain Research, 1483, 39–53.Google Scholar
Voga, M., & Grainger, J. (2007). Cognate status and cross-script translation priming. Memory & Cognition, 35, 938–952.Google Scholar
Wydell, T. N., Butterworth, B., & Patterson, K. (1995). The inconsistency of consistency effects in reading: The case of Japanese Kanji. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1169–1185.Google Scholar
Zhou, H., Chen, B., Yang, M., & Dunlap, S. (2010). Language nonselective access to phonological representations: Evidence from Chinese–English bilinguals. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 2051–2066.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Ando Supplementary Material

Supplementary Materials

Download Ando Supplementary Material(PDF)
PDF 242.5 KB