Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T11:31:38.430Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

To see or not to see: The roles of item properties and language knowledge in Chinese missing logographeme effect

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 October 2020

Xiuli Tong Open the ORCID record for Xiuli Tong [Opens in a new window] ,
Qinli Deng ,
Hélène Deacon Open the ORCID record for Hélène Deacon [Opens in a new window] ,
Jean Saint-Aubin  and
Suiping Wang
Xiuli Tong*
Affiliation:
University of Hong Kong
Qinli Deng
Affiliation:
University of Hong Kong
Hélène Deacon
Affiliation:
Dalhousie University
Jean Saint-Aubin
Affiliation:
Université de Moncton
Suiping Wang
Affiliation:
South China Normal University
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examined how language knowledge and item properties (i.e., semantic relatedness and position) influenced Chinese missing logographeme effects. Eighty-four Chinese readers and 53 English readers were asked to search for the Chinese logographeme 口 while reading a Chinese prose passage. The target 口 appeared in five different positions (i.e., left, right, top, bottom, or inside), varying its degree of semantic relatedness to its embedded characters. The generalized linear mixed-effect model revealed a significant interaction between semantic relatedness and position in Chinese, but not in English, readers when visual complexity and frequency were controlled. For Chinese readers, a higher omission rate occurred when 口 appeared in the top and inside positions and exhibited low semantic relatedness with its embedded characters, whereas 口 was omitted more when it was positioned on the right and exhibited high semantic relatedness to its embedded characters. English readers exhibited a different omission pattern: 口 was omitted more when it appeared in the left or right position irrespective of semantic relatedness. In addition, 口 was omitted more in the inside, rather than the bottom, position. These findings suggest that the omission rate of the logographeme is determined by item properties at the sublexical level and the reader’s language knowledge.

Keywords

missing logographeme effectpositionreading experiencesemantic relatedness
Type
Original Article
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 41 , Issue 5 , September 2020 , pp. 1113 - 1139
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Assink, E. M., & Knuijt, P. P. (2000). Reading development and attention to letters in words. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 347–362. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1010 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bai, X., Yan, G., Liversedge, S. P., Zang, C., & Rayner, K. (2008). Reading spaced and unspaced Chinese text: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1277. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.34.5.1277 Google ScholarPubMed
Bassetti, B. (2009). Effects of adding interword spacing on Chinese reading: A comparison of Chinese native readers and English readers of Chinese as a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 30, 757–775. doi: 10.1017/S0142716409990105 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beyersmann, E., Ziegler, J. C., & Grainger, J. (2015). Differences in the processing of prefixes and suffixes revealed by a letter-search task. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19, 360–373. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2015.1057824 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blythe, H. I., Liang, F., Zang, C., Wang, J., Yan, G., Bai, X., & Liversedge, S. P. (2012). Inserting spaces into Chinese text helps readers to learn new words: An eye movement study. Journal of Memory and Language, 67, 241–254. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.05.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourne, C. P., & Ford, D. F. (1961). A study of the statistics of letters in English words. Information and Control, 4, 48–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, L. Y., Plaut, D. C., & Perfetti, C. A. (2016). Visual complexity in orthographic learning: Modeling learning across writing system variations. Scientific Studies of Reading, 20, 64–85. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2015.1104688 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Q., Gu, W., & Christoph, S. (2016). Effects of text segmentation on silent reading of Chinese regulated poems: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 44, 265–286. doi: 10.1091/3723/2016/4402-0001 Google Scholar
Chitiri, H. F., & Willows, D. M. (1997). Bilingual word recognition in English and Greek. Applied Psycholinguistics, 18, 139–156. doi: 10.1017/S0142716400009942 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corcoran, D. W. J. (1966). An acoustic factor in letter cancellation. Nature, 210, 658. doi: 10.1038/210658a0 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drewnowski, A. (1981). Missing-ing in reading: Developmental changes in reading units. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 31, 154–168. doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(81)90009-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drewnowski, A., & Healy, A. F. (1980). Missing-ing in reading: Letter detection errors on word endings. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 247–262. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90212-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, S. N., & Chuan, V. (2010). Chinese radical detection also depends on linguistic role. Scientific Studies of Reading, 14, 544–553. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2010.481700 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, S. N., Healy, A. F., Koriat, A., & Kreiner, H. (2004). The GO model: A reconsideration of the role of structural units in guiding and organizing text on line. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 428–433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guérard, K., Saint-Aubin, J., Poirier, M., & Demetriou, C. (2012). Assessing the influence of letter position in reading normal and transposed texts using a letter detection task. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 227–238. doi: 10.1037/a0028494 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Healy, A. F. (1976). Detection errors on the word the: Evidence for reading units larger than letters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2, 235. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.2.2.235 Google ScholarPubMed
Healy, A. F. (1994). Letter detection: A window to unitization and other cognitive processes in reading text. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 333–344. doi: 10.3758/BF03213975 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Healy, A. F., & Cunningham, T. F. (2014). Detecting letters and words in prose passages: A test of alternative theoretical accounts of the missing letter effect. American Journal of Psychology, 127, 281–302. doi: 10.5406/amerjpsyc.127.3.0281 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klein, R. M., & Saint-Aubin, J. (2016). What a simple letter-detection task can tell us about cognitive processes in reading. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25, 417–424. doi: 10.1177/0963721416661173 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koriat, A., & Greenberg, S. N. (1991). Syntactic control of letter detection: Evidence from English and Hebrew nonwords. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 1035–1050. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.17.6.1035 Google Scholar
Koriat, A., & Greenberg, S. N. (1994). The extraction of phrase structure during reading: Evidence from letter detection errors. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 345–356. doi: 10.3758/BF03213976 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Law, S. P., & Leung, M. T. (2000). Structural representations of characters in Chinese writing: Evidence from a case of acquired dysgraphia. Psychologia, 43, 67–83 Google Scholar
Liu, D., Chen, X., & Wang, Y. (2016). The impact of visual-spatial attention on reading and spelling in Chinese children. Reading and Writing, 29, 1–13. doi: 10.1007/s11145-016-9644-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minkoff, S. R., & Raney, G. E. (2000). Letter-detection errors in the word the: Word frequency versus syntactic structure. Scientific Studies of Reading, 4, 55–76. doi: 10.1207/S1532799XSSR0401_5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müsseler, J., Koriat, A., & Nißlein, M. (2000). Letter-detection patterns in German: A window to the early extraction of sentential structure during reading. Memory & Cognition, 28, 993–1003. doi: 10.3758/BF03209347 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Müsseler, J., Nißlein, M., & Koriat, A. (2005). German capitalization of nouns and the detection of letters in continuous text. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 143. doi: 10.1037/h0087470 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plamondon, A., Roy-Charland, A., Chamberland, J., Quenneville, J., & Laforge, C. (2017). The impact of familiarization strategies on the missing-letter effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70, 1675–1683. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2016.1199718 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Development Core Team. (2011). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Roy-Charland, A., Saint-Aubin, J., Klein, R. M., & Lawrence, M. (2007). Eye movements as direct tests of the GO model for the missing-letter effect. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 69, 324–337. doi: 10.3758/BF03193753 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saenger, P. (1997). Space between words: The origins of silent reading. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Saint-Aubin, J., & Klein, R. M. (2004). One missing-letter effect: Two methods of assessment. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 61. doi: 10.1037/h0087440 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schneider, V. I., & Healy, A. F. (1993). Detecting phonemes and letters in text: Interactions between different types and levels of processes. Memory & Cognition, 21, 739–751. doi: 10.3758/BF03202742 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shi, B. J., Li, H., Zhang, Y. P., & Shu, H. (2011). The role of logographeme characteristics and orthographic awareness in low-grade children’s writing development. Psychological Development and Education, 27, 297–303.Google Scholar
State Language Commission. (1998). The Chinese character component standard of GB13000.1 character set for information processing. Beijing, China: Language & Culture Press.Google Scholar
State Language Commission of China. (1988). 现代汉语常用字表 [List of frequently used modern Chinese characters]. Beijing, China: Language Press.Google Scholar
Tao, L., & Healy, A. F. (2002). The unitization effect in reading Chinese and English text. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6, 167–197. doi: 10.1207/S1532799XSSR0602_03 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tong, X., & McBride, C. (2018). Toward a graded psycholexical space mapping model: Sublexical and lexical representations in Chinese character reading development. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 51, 482–489. doi: 10.1177/0022219417718199 CrossRefGoogle Scholar