Cargando…

Lexical Stress and Linguistic Predictability Influence Proofreading Behavior

There is extensive evidence that the segmental (i.e., phonemic) layer of phonology is routinely activated during reading, but little is known about whether phonological activation extends beyond phonemes to subsegmental layers (which include articulatory information, such as voicing) and suprasegmen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Harris, Lindsay N., Perfetti, Charles A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4746312/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26903904
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00096
_version_ 1782414792709898240
author Harris, Lindsay N.
Perfetti, Charles A.
author_facet Harris, Lindsay N.
Perfetti, Charles A.
author_sort Harris, Lindsay N.
collection PubMed
description There is extensive evidence that the segmental (i.e., phonemic) layer of phonology is routinely activated during reading, but little is known about whether phonological activation extends beyond phonemes to subsegmental layers (which include articulatory information, such as voicing) and suprasegmental layers (which include prosodic information, such as lexical stress). In three proofreading experiments, we show that spelling errors are detected more reliably in syllables that are stressed than in syllables that are unstressed if comprehension is a goal of the reader, indicating that suprasegmental phonology is both active during silent reading and can influence orthographic processes. In Experiment 1, participants received instructions to read for both errors and comprehension, and we found that the effect of lexical stress interacted with linguistic predictability, such that detection of errors in more predictable words was aided by stress but detection of errors in less predictable words was not. This finding suggests that lexical stress patterns can be accessed prelexically if an upcoming word is sufficiently predictable from context. Participants with stronger vocabularies showed decreased effects of stress on task performance, which is consistent with previous findings that more skilled readers are less swayed by phonological information in decisions about orthographic form. In two subsequent experiments, participants were instructed to read only for errors (Experiment 2) or only for comprehension (Experiment 3); the effect of stress disappeared when participants read for errors and reappeared when participants read for comprehension, reconfirming our hypothesis that predictability is a driver of lexical stress effects. In all experiments, errors were detected more reliably in words that were difficult to predict from context than in words that were highly predictable. Taken together, this series of experiments contributes two important findings to the field of reading and cognition: (1) The prosodic property of lexical stress can influence orthographic processing, and (2) Predictability inhibits the detection of errors in written language processing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4746312
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47463122016-02-22 Lexical Stress and Linguistic Predictability Influence Proofreading Behavior Harris, Lindsay N. Perfetti, Charles A. Front Psychol Psychology There is extensive evidence that the segmental (i.e., phonemic) layer of phonology is routinely activated during reading, but little is known about whether phonological activation extends beyond phonemes to subsegmental layers (which include articulatory information, such as voicing) and suprasegmental layers (which include prosodic information, such as lexical stress). In three proofreading experiments, we show that spelling errors are detected more reliably in syllables that are stressed than in syllables that are unstressed if comprehension is a goal of the reader, indicating that suprasegmental phonology is both active during silent reading and can influence orthographic processes. In Experiment 1, participants received instructions to read for both errors and comprehension, and we found that the effect of lexical stress interacted with linguistic predictability, such that detection of errors in more predictable words was aided by stress but detection of errors in less predictable words was not. This finding suggests that lexical stress patterns can be accessed prelexically if an upcoming word is sufficiently predictable from context. Participants with stronger vocabularies showed decreased effects of stress on task performance, which is consistent with previous findings that more skilled readers are less swayed by phonological information in decisions about orthographic form. In two subsequent experiments, participants were instructed to read only for errors (Experiment 2) or only for comprehension (Experiment 3); the effect of stress disappeared when participants read for errors and reappeared when participants read for comprehension, reconfirming our hypothesis that predictability is a driver of lexical stress effects. In all experiments, errors were detected more reliably in words that were difficult to predict from context than in words that were highly predictable. Taken together, this series of experiments contributes two important findings to the field of reading and cognition: (1) The prosodic property of lexical stress can influence orthographic processing, and (2) Predictability inhibits the detection of errors in written language processing. Frontiers Media S.A. 2016-02-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4746312/ /pubmed/26903904 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00096 Text en Copyright © 2016 Harris and Perfetti. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Harris, Lindsay N.
Perfetti, Charles A.
Lexical Stress and Linguistic Predictability Influence Proofreading Behavior
title Lexical Stress and Linguistic Predictability Influence Proofreading Behavior
title_full Lexical Stress and Linguistic Predictability Influence Proofreading Behavior
title_fullStr Lexical Stress and Linguistic Predictability Influence Proofreading Behavior
title_full_unstemmed Lexical Stress and Linguistic Predictability Influence Proofreading Behavior
title_short Lexical Stress and Linguistic Predictability Influence Proofreading Behavior
title_sort lexical stress and linguistic predictability influence proofreading behavior
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4746312/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26903904
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00096
work_keys_str_mv AT harrislindsayn lexicalstressandlinguisticpredictabilityinfluenceproofreadingbehavior
AT perfetticharlesa lexicalstressandlinguisticpredictabilityinfluenceproofreadingbehavior