Serial processing in Reading aloud: No challenge for a parallel model

Marco Zorzi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

K. Rastle and M. Coltheart (1999) challenged parallel models of reading by showing that the cost of irregularity in low-frequency exception words was modulated by the position of the irregularity in the word. This position-of-irregularity effect was taken as strong evidence of serial processing in reading. This article refutes Rastle and Coltheart's theoretical conclusions in 3 ways: First, a parallel model, the connectionist dual process model (M. Zorzi, G. Houghton & B. Butterworth, 1998b), produces a position-of-irregularity effect. Second, the supposed serial effect can be reduced to a position-specific grapheme-phoneme consistency effect. Third, the position-of-irregularity effect vanishes when the experimental data are reanalyzed using grapheme-phoneme consistency as the covariate. This demonstration has broader implications for studies aiming at adjudicating between models: Strong inferences should be avoided until the computational models are actually tested.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)847-856
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
Volume26
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2000

Fingerprint

Reading
Neural Networks (Computer)
Costs and Cost Analysis
Reading Aloud
Grapheme
Phoneme

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Cite this

Serial processing in Reading aloud : No challenge for a parallel model. / Zorzi, Marco.

In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, Vol. 26, No. 2, 04.2000, p. 847-856.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f9d94d195776406c8c30871ae8222c80,
title = "Serial processing in Reading aloud: No challenge for a parallel model",
abstract = "K. Rastle and M. Coltheart (1999) challenged parallel models of reading by showing that the cost of irregularity in low-frequency exception words was modulated by the position of the irregularity in the word. This position-of-irregularity effect was taken as strong evidence of serial processing in reading. This article refutes Rastle and Coltheart's theoretical conclusions in 3 ways: First, a parallel model, the connectionist dual process model (M. Zorzi, G. Houghton & B. Butterworth, 1998b), produces a position-of-irregularity effect. Second, the supposed serial effect can be reduced to a position-specific grapheme-phoneme consistency effect. Third, the position-of-irregularity effect vanishes when the experimental data are reanalyzed using grapheme-phoneme consistency as the covariate. This demonstration has broader implications for studies aiming at adjudicating between models: Strong inferences should be avoided until the computational models are actually tested.",
author = "Marco Zorzi",
year = "2000",
month = "4",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "847--856",
journal = "Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance",
issn = "0096-1523",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Serial processing in Reading aloud

T2 - No challenge for a parallel model

AU - Zorzi, Marco

PY - 2000/4

Y1 - 2000/4

N2 - K. Rastle and M. Coltheart (1999) challenged parallel models of reading by showing that the cost of irregularity in low-frequency exception words was modulated by the position of the irregularity in the word. This position-of-irregularity effect was taken as strong evidence of serial processing in reading. This article refutes Rastle and Coltheart's theoretical conclusions in 3 ways: First, a parallel model, the connectionist dual process model (M. Zorzi, G. Houghton & B. Butterworth, 1998b), produces a position-of-irregularity effect. Second, the supposed serial effect can be reduced to a position-specific grapheme-phoneme consistency effect. Third, the position-of-irregularity effect vanishes when the experimental data are reanalyzed using grapheme-phoneme consistency as the covariate. This demonstration has broader implications for studies aiming at adjudicating between models: Strong inferences should be avoided until the computational models are actually tested.

AB - K. Rastle and M. Coltheart (1999) challenged parallel models of reading by showing that the cost of irregularity in low-frequency exception words was modulated by the position of the irregularity in the word. This position-of-irregularity effect was taken as strong evidence of serial processing in reading. This article refutes Rastle and Coltheart's theoretical conclusions in 3 ways: First, a parallel model, the connectionist dual process model (M. Zorzi, G. Houghton & B. Butterworth, 1998b), produces a position-of-irregularity effect. Second, the supposed serial effect can be reduced to a position-specific grapheme-phoneme consistency effect. Third, the position-of-irregularity effect vanishes when the experimental data are reanalyzed using grapheme-phoneme consistency as the covariate. This demonstration has broader implications for studies aiming at adjudicating between models: Strong inferences should be avoided until the computational models are actually tested.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034167730&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034167730&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 10811180

AN - SCOPUS:0034167730

VL - 26

SP - 847

EP - 856

JO - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

JF - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

SN - 0096-1523

IS - 2

ER -