Cargando…
The transposed-word effect provides no unequivocal evidence for parallel processing
Studies using a grammaticality decision task have revealed surprising flexibility in the processing of word order during sentence reading in both alphabetic and non-alphabetic scripts. Participants in these studies typically exhibit a transposed-word effect, in which they make more errors and slower...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10600278/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37188860 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-023-02721-5 |
_version_ | 1785125956824858624 |
---|---|
author | Milledge, Sara V. Bhatia, Neya Mensah-Mcleod, Loren Raghvani, Pallvi A. McGowan, Victoria Elsherif, Mahmoud M. Cutter, Michael G. Wang, Jingxin Liu, Zhiwei Paterson, Kevin B. |
author_facet | Milledge, Sara V. Bhatia, Neya Mensah-Mcleod, Loren Raghvani, Pallvi A. McGowan, Victoria Elsherif, Mahmoud M. Cutter, Michael G. Wang, Jingxin Liu, Zhiwei Paterson, Kevin B. |
author_sort | Milledge, Sara V. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Studies using a grammaticality decision task have revealed surprising flexibility in the processing of word order during sentence reading in both alphabetic and non-alphabetic scripts. Participants in these studies typically exhibit a transposed-word effect, in which they make more errors and slower correct responses for stimuli that contain a word transposition and are derived from grammatical as compared to ungrammatical base sentences. Some researchers have used this finding to argue that words are encoded in parallel during reading, such that multiple words can be processed simultaneously and might be recognised out of order. This contrasts with an alternative account of the reading process, which argues that words must be encoded serially, one at a time. We examined, in English, whether the transposed-word effect provides evidence for a parallel-processing account, employing the same grammaticality decision task used in previous research and display procedures that either allowed for parallel word encoding or permitted only the serial encoding of words. Our results replicate and extend recent findings by showing that relative word order can be processed flexibly even when parallel processing is not possible (i.e., within displays requiring serial word encoding). Accordingly, while the present findings provide further evidence for flexibility in the processing of relative word order during reading, they add to converging evidence that the transposed-word effect does not provide unequivocal evidence for a parallel-processing account of reading. We consider how the present findings may be accounted for by both serial and parallel accounts of word recognition in reading. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10600278 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106002782023-10-27 The transposed-word effect provides no unequivocal evidence for parallel processing Milledge, Sara V. Bhatia, Neya Mensah-Mcleod, Loren Raghvani, Pallvi A. McGowan, Victoria Elsherif, Mahmoud M. Cutter, Michael G. Wang, Jingxin Liu, Zhiwei Paterson, Kevin B. Atten Percept Psychophys Short Report Studies using a grammaticality decision task have revealed surprising flexibility in the processing of word order during sentence reading in both alphabetic and non-alphabetic scripts. Participants in these studies typically exhibit a transposed-word effect, in which they make more errors and slower correct responses for stimuli that contain a word transposition and are derived from grammatical as compared to ungrammatical base sentences. Some researchers have used this finding to argue that words are encoded in parallel during reading, such that multiple words can be processed simultaneously and might be recognised out of order. This contrasts with an alternative account of the reading process, which argues that words must be encoded serially, one at a time. We examined, in English, whether the transposed-word effect provides evidence for a parallel-processing account, employing the same grammaticality decision task used in previous research and display procedures that either allowed for parallel word encoding or permitted only the serial encoding of words. Our results replicate and extend recent findings by showing that relative word order can be processed flexibly even when parallel processing is not possible (i.e., within displays requiring serial word encoding). Accordingly, while the present findings provide further evidence for flexibility in the processing of relative word order during reading, they add to converging evidence that the transposed-word effect does not provide unequivocal evidence for a parallel-processing account of reading. We consider how the present findings may be accounted for by both serial and parallel accounts of word recognition in reading. Springer US 2023-05-15 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10600278/ /pubmed/37188860 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-023-02721-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Short Report Milledge, Sara V. Bhatia, Neya Mensah-Mcleod, Loren Raghvani, Pallvi A. McGowan, Victoria Elsherif, Mahmoud M. Cutter, Michael G. Wang, Jingxin Liu, Zhiwei Paterson, Kevin B. The transposed-word effect provides no unequivocal evidence for parallel processing |
title | The transposed-word effect provides no unequivocal evidence for parallel processing |
title_full | The transposed-word effect provides no unequivocal evidence for parallel processing |
title_fullStr | The transposed-word effect provides no unequivocal evidence for parallel processing |
title_full_unstemmed | The transposed-word effect provides no unequivocal evidence for parallel processing |
title_short | The transposed-word effect provides no unequivocal evidence for parallel processing |
title_sort | transposed-word effect provides no unequivocal evidence for parallel processing |
topic | Short Report |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10600278/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37188860 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-023-02721-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT milledgesarav thetransposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT bhatianeya thetransposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT mensahmcleodloren thetransposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT raghvanipallvi thetransposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT amcgowanvictoria thetransposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT elsherifmahmoudm thetransposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT cuttermichaelg thetransposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT wangjingxin thetransposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT liuzhiwei thetransposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT patersonkevinb thetransposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT milledgesarav transposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT bhatianeya transposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT mensahmcleodloren transposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT raghvanipallvi transposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT amcgowanvictoria transposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT elsherifmahmoudm transposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT cuttermichaelg transposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT wangjingxin transposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT liuzhiwei transposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing AT patersonkevinb transposedwordeffectprovidesnounequivocalevidenceforparallelprocessing |