Term
| Steps of Visual Word Processing and Timings, General Locations |
|
Definition
- Visual Feature Analysis -- ~100 ms post-stimulus (M100/130), Bilateral Occipital Lobe
- Abstract Representation -- ~150-200 ms (M150/170), VWFA
- Lexical Access -- ~200-400 ms (M350), Left Temporal Lobe
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- MEG
- Show progressively longer and more garbled letter strings, with a "shapes" control.
- Shapes AND letter control show visual M100 in "bilateral visual cortex" (occipital lobe)
- No evidence at this stage for language specific processing (feature analysis, stage I)
- Left-lateralized, inferior occipitotemporal M150/170
- Sensitive to letter vs. non-letter (Representation, stage II)
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- VWFA
- Left Occipito-Temporal Sulcus near the L Fusiform Gyrus
- Activated more by words/pseudowords than non-words
- Only activated visually
- NOT sensitive to lexical factors (frequency, e.g.)
- Case-invariant representation (font, position, etc.)
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- Priming task + fMRI
- capital-lowercase, similar vs. dissimilar appearances (C-c vs. A-a)
- Priming evident for both, but similar objects significantly activate VWFA
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- MEG
- Repeats 1999 experiment (longer letter strings, hazier vs. FACES)
- Does VWFA activate for ANY relevant stimuli?
- M150 found, but in RH homologue to VWFA for faces
- Double dissociation of face processing and object recognition
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- ER fMRI (randomization)
- Hebrew orthography vs. English in English vs. Hebrew bilinguals
- Half passive viewing, half one-back paradigm (say if a word is repeated)
- English had highest response to Eng words/nonwords
- Hebrew highest activation to Hebrew and Word+consonant strings
- Evidence for language dependency of VWFA
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- There is no VWFA
- Activated also by naming tasks, repetition, reading Braille
- VWFA lesions do not correlate with visual reading difficulties.
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- fMRI
- Orthographic task (read words) vs. auditory task (hear words)
- Orth targets (does the word have a descender?) vs. auditory targets (does the word contain /a/?)
- Stimuli mattered, not target
- Displayed the LIMA area near VWFA was activated by auditory stimuli, was nearly indistinguishable from VWFA, previous research against VWFA was misled.
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- Cannot pronounce exception words correctly ("pint").
- Relies only on letter-sound access (no whole-word storage)
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- Cannot pronounce unknown or non-words
- Only stores previously known words, cannot connect letter-sound readings on the fly.
|
|
|
Term
| Marslen-Wilson 1973, 1975 |
|
Definition
- Speech Shadowing task
- Participants almost immediately repeated required words ~250 ms after.
- Indicates active search for word candidates, some kind of system to eliminate incorrect candidates.
- COHORT model is suggested (eliminate wrong words as new phonemes are heard)
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- MEG
- Shown words decreasing in frequency
- M350 sensitive to frequency
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- MEG
- Long-lag priming (prime, then same word many words later)
- M350 latency reduce for primes, LT & Parietal areas near Wernicke's area
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- MEG
- High vs. low probability/neighborhood density, word vs. non-word
- M350 sensitive to prob/density, dif btw. word/non-word
|
|
|
Term
| Atomism/ Single Route: Storage |
|
Definition
- All words and inflections are stored separately
- regular verbs are related phonologically to roots
- irregulars are related semantically
- morphology isn't necessary
|
|
|
Term
| Decomposition/ Single Route: Rules |
|
Definition
- All words broken into root + infl.
- Economical storage, relies on computation
- Regulars are broken down as normal
- Irregulars have stored homologues for roots, but otherwise broken as normal.
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- fMRI
- orth+semantic prime vs. only semantic vs. only orth vs. neither
- orth+sem activates both orth and semantic areas together, no special "morphology" area
- morphology isn't necessary
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- fMRI
- Devlin et al.'s stimuli that were +orth could be exhaustively broken down by a full decomp system.
- Uses same stimuli, tries to remove all stimuli that can be exhaustively broken
- Larger priming for morphologically related primes, in L Ant Mid Occ Gyrus (A-MOG)
- Morphology totally does exist
|
|
|
Term
| Dual Route Model for Inflection |
|
Definition
- Pinker/Ullman
- Regulars processed as decomposition, in Broca's area ("Grammar")
- Irregulars processed in LT, as atomism ("Lexicon".)
- Problem that semantics and irregulars are not correlated
|
|
|
Term
| Why use compounds for dissociating route models |
|
Definition
- No bound morphemes
- can significantly deviate from semantic meaning of morphemes (honeymoon)
|
|
|
Term
| Motivation for Feature Analysis (Studies + Evidence) |
|
Definition
- Tarkiainen et al. 1999 -- M100 (Type I Response) to letter and symbol strings, not sensitive to linguistics
|
|
|
Term
| Motivation for Abstract Representation (Studies + Evidence) |
|
Definition
- Tarkiainen et al. 1999 -- M150 (Type II Response) to letter strings more than symbols in A-MOG (VWFA), linguistically sensitive
- Dehaene et al. 2001 -- Priming effect for similar letters, some letter specialization but not concrete
- Tarkiainen et al. 2002 -- Repeated 1999 study but compared letters to faces, separated VWFA from FFA (Fusiform Face Area), dissociation of facial vs. letter specialization
- Baker et al. 2007 -- Hebrew vs. English orthography, VWFA is language-sensitive (must learn that certain orthography matters)
- Cohen et al. 2004 -- Vis vs. Aud stimuli, Vis vs. Aud task, only stimulus matters, VWFA is definitely visual, dissociation of VWFA and LIMA (general auditory analysis area)
- Vinckier et al. 2007 -- VWFA is definitely specialized for language, more activation for more wordlike stimuli as anterior progression
|
|
|
Term
| Motivation for Word vs. Letter-level language processing |
|
Definition
- Surface Dyslexia -- only phonological processing, no new whole-word storage (non-words)
- Phonological Dyslexia-- Only whole-word storage, no phonological processing (exception words)
|
|
|
Term
| Motivation for Lexical Access @ M350 (Studies + Evidence) |
|
Definition
- Pylkkanen et al. 2002-- M350 effect for Probability/Density effects, lower RT for higher density (more choices=more processing time)
- Okada and Hickock 2004-- No activation for non-words in LT=no density effect, no decisions required
|
|
|
Term
| Motivation for existence of Morphology |
|
Definition
- Gold & Rastle 2007-- Exhaustive breakdown of non-decompositional words (passive-pass), large priming for actually morphological words, unique activation in A-MOG (VWFA)
- Fiorentino & Fund-Reznicek 2009-- priming for transparent and opaque meanings, not form overlap
|
|
|
Term
| Motivation for Inflection/Decomposition |
|
Definition
- Tyler et al. 2004-- Aphasics w/ semantic dementia still do fine with irregulars (not a problem for decomp)
- Tyler et al. 2002-- Broca's aphasics cannot detect difference in regular primes (played-play) but can for phonological (trade-tray), morph substitutes for regulars
- Semenza et al. 1997-- Verb aphasics cannot produce noun compounds containing verbs
- Delazar & Semenza 1998-- Compound aphasics produce rule-based substitutes for compound stimuli, no problem with long monomorphemic words
- Fiorentino & Poeppel 2007-- Compounds with same surface probability but higher decomped probability show low RT, facilitating MEG latency for words with high decomped prob
- Fiorentino & Fund-Reznicek 2009-- Transparent (teacup-tea) and opaque (bellhop-bell) primes facilitate, orthographic primes do not (penguin-pen), based on decomp morphemic representation
|
|
|
