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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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.
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