Читать книгу The Science of Reading - Группа авторов - Страница 54

1 Allen, J., & Seidenberg, M.S. (1999). Grammaticality judgment and aphasia: A connectionist account. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), The Emergence of Language (pp. 115–151). Erlbaum.Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

2 Andrews, S., & Scarratt, D. R. (1998). Rule and analogy mechanisms in reading nonwords: Hough dou peapel rede gnew wirds? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(4), 1052–1086. doi: 10.1037/0096‐1523.24.4.1052.

3 Backman, J., Bruck, M., Hebert, M., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1984). Acquisition and use of spelling‐sound information in reading. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 38(1), 114–113. doi: 10.1016/0022‐0965(84)90022‐5.

4 Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Cortese, M. J., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., Neely, J. H., Nelson, D. L., Simpson, G. B., & Treiman, R. (2007). The English lexicon project. Behavior Research Methods, 39(3), 445–459. doi: 10.3758/bf03193014.

5 Baron, J. & Strawson, C. (1976). Use of orthographic and word‐specific knowledge in reading words aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2(3), 386–393. doi: 10.1037/0096‐1523.2.3.386.

6 Barton, J. J., Hanif, H. M., Eklinder Björnström, L., & Hills, C. (2014). The word‐length effect in reading: A review. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 31(5–6), 378–412. doi: 10.1080/02643294.2014.895314.

7 Berko, J. (1958). The child's learning of English morphology. Word, 14(2–3), 150–177.

8 Bouhali, F., Bézagu, Z., Dehaene, S., & Cohen, L. (2019). A mesial‐to‐lateral dissociation for orthographic processing in the visual cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(43), 21936–21946. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1904184116.

9 Chang, Y. N., Taylor, J. S., Rastle, K., & Monaghan, P. (2020). The relationships between oral language and reading instruction: Evidence from a computational model of reading. Cognitive Psychology, 123, 101336. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2020.101336.

10 Chee, Q. W., Chow, K. J., Yap, M. J., & Goh, W. D. (2020). Consistency norms for 37,677 English words. Behavior Research Methods, 52, 2535–2555. 10.3758/s13428‐020‐01391‐7.

11 Chen, L., Ralph, M. A. L., & Rogers, T. T. (2017). A unified model of human semantic knowledge and its disorders. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(3), 1–10. doi: 10.1038/s41562‐016‐0039.

12 Clark S. (2015). Vector space models of lexical meaning. In S. Lappin & C. Fox (Eds.), The handbook of contemporary semantic theory (pp. 493–522). Wiley. doi: 10.1002/9781118882139.CH16.

13 Cohen‐Shikora, E. R., & Balota, D. A. (2016). Visual word recognition across the adult lifespan. Psychology and Aging, 31(5), 488–502. doi: 10.1037/pag0000100.

14 Coltheart, M. (1978). Lexical access in simple reading tasks. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Strategies of Information Processing (pp. 151–216). Academic Press.

15 Coltheart, M. (2005). Modeling reading: The dual‐route approach. In M. J. Snowling & C. E. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 6–23). Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470757642.ch1

16 Coltheart, M. (2006). Acquired dyslexias and the computational modelling of reading. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 23(1), 96–109. doi: 10.1080/02643290500202649.

17 Coltheart, M., Curtis, B., Atkins, P., & Haller, M. (1993). Models of reading aloud: Dual‐route and parallel‐distributed‐processing approaches. Psychological Review, 100(4), 589–608. doi: 10.1037/0033‐295X.100.4.589.

18 Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108(1), 204–256. doi: 10.1037/0033‐295x.108.1.204.

19 Coltheart, V., & Leahy, J. (1992). Children's and adults' reading of nonwords: Effects of regularity and consistency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(4), 718–729. doi: 10.1037//0278‐7393.18.4.718.

20 Cortese, M. J., & Simpson, G. B. (2000). Regularity effects in word naming: What are they? Memory & Cognition, 28(8), 1269–1276. doi: 10.3758/bf03211827.

21 Cosky, M. J. (1976). The role of letter recognition in word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 4(2), 207–214. doi: 10.3758/BF03213165.

22 Cox, C. R., Seidenberg, M. S., & Rogers, T. T. (2015). Connecting functional brain imaging and Parallel Distributed Processing, Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30, 380–394. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2014.994010.

23 Ellis, R. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning. System, 33(2), 209–224. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2004.12.006.

24 Evans, G. A., Ralph, M. A. L., & Woollams, A. M. (2012). What’s in a word? A parametric study of semantic influences on visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 19(2), 325–331. doi: 10.3758/s13423‐011‐0213‐7.

25 Foorman, B. R., Francis, D. J., Novy, D. M., & Liberman, D. (1991). How letter‐sound instruction mediates progress in first‐grade reading and spelling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 456–459. doi: 10.1037/0022‐0663.83.4.456.

26 Forster, K. I., & Chambers, S. M. (1973). Lexical access and naming time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12(6), 627–635. doi: 10.1016/S0022‐5371(73)80042‐8.

27 Frederiksen, J. R., & Kroll, J. F. (1976). Spelling and sound: Approaches to the internal lexicon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2(3), 361–379. doi: 10.1037/0096‐1523.2.3.361.

28 Frost, S. J., Mencl, W. E., Sandak, R., Moore, D. L., Rueckl, J. G., Katz, L., Fulbright, R. K., & Pugh, K. R. (2005). A functional magnetic resonance imaging study of the tradeoff between semantics and phonology in reading aloud. Neuroreport, 16(6), 621–624. doi: 10.1097/00001756‐200504250‐00021.

29 Gibson, B. R., Rogers, T. T., & Zhu, X. (2013). Human semi‐supervised learning. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5(1), 132–172. doi: 10.1111/tops.12010.

30 Glushko, R. J. (1979). The organization and activation of orthographic knowledge in reading aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5(4), 674–691. doi: 10.1037/0096‐1523.5.4.674.

31 Gordon, J. K., & Dell, G. S. (2003). Learning to divide the labor: An account of deficits in light and heavy verb production. Cognitive Science, 27(1), 1–40. doi: 10.1016/S0364‐0213(02)00111‐8.

32 Graves, W. W., Binder, J. R., Desai, R. H., Humphries, C., Stengel, B. C., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2014). Anatomy is strategy: Skilled reading differences associated with structural connectivity differences in the reading network. Brain and Language, 133, 1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2014.03.005.

33 Griffiths, T. L., Chater, N., Kemp, C., Perfors, A., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2010). Probabilistic models of cognition: Exploring representations and inductive biases. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(8), 357–364. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2010.05.004.

34 Harm, M. W., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1999). Reading acquisition, phonology, and dyslexia: Insights from a connectionist model. Psychological Review, 106, 491–528. doi: 10.1037/0033‐295x.106.3.491.

35 Harm, M. W., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 111(3), 662–720. doi: 10.1037/0033‐295X.111.3.662.

36 Hoffman, P., Lambon Ralph, M. A., & Woollams, A. M. (2015). Triangulation of the neurocomputational architecture underpinning reading aloud. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(28), E3719–E3728. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1502032112.

37 Jared, D. (1997). Spelling‐sound consistency affects the naming of high‐frequency words. Journal of Memory and Language, 36(4), 505–529. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1997.2496.

38 Jared, D. (2002). Spelling‐sound consistency and regularity effects in word naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 46(4), 723–750. doi: 10.1006/jmla.2001.2827.

39 Jared, D., McRae, K., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1990). The basis of consistency effects in word naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 29(6), 687–715. doi: 10.1016/0749‐596X(90)90044‐Z.

40 Joanisse, M. F., & McClelland, J. L. (2015). Connectionist perspectives on language learning, representation and processing. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 6(3), 235–247. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1340.

41 Juliano, C., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1994). A constraint‐based lexicalist account of the subject/object attachment preference. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 23(6), 459–471. doi: 10.1007/BF02146685.

42 Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

43 Kessler, B., & Treiman, R. (2001). Relationships between sounds and letters in English monosyllables. Journal of Memory and Language, 44(4), 592–617. doi: 10.1006/jmla.2000.2745.

44 Kumaran, D., Hassabis, D., & McClelland, J. L. (2016). What learning systems do intelligent agents need? Complementary learning systems theory updated. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(7), 512–534. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2016.05.004.

45 Lambon Ralph, M. A., Jefferies, E., Patterson, K., & Rogers, T. T. (2017). The neural and computational bases of semantic cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 18(1), 42–55. doi: 10.1038/nrn.2016.150.

46 MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101(4), 676–703. doi: 10.1037/0033‐295x.101.4.676.

47 Marshall, J. C., & Newcombe, F. (1973). Patterns of paralexia: A psycholinguistic approach. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2(3), 175–199. doi: 10.1007/BF01067101.

48 Mason, M. (1978). The role of spatial redundancy in grapheme recognition: Perception or inference? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4(4), 662–673. doi: 10.1037/0096‐1523.4.4.662.

49 New, B., Ferrand, L., Pallier, C., & Brysbaert, M. (2006). Reexamining the word length effect in visual word recognition: new evidence from the English Lexicon Project. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13, 45–52. doi: 10.3758/bf03193811.

50 Paap, K. R., & Noel, R. W. (1991). Dual‐route models of print to sound: Still a good horse race. Psychological Research, 53(1), 13–24. doi: 10.1007/BF00867328.

51 Patterson, K., & Lambon Ralph, M. A. (1999). Selective disorders of reading? Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 9(2), 235–239. doi: 10.1016/s0959‐4388(99)80033‐6.

52 Pearlmutter, N. J., & MacDonald, M. C. (1995). Individual differences and probabilistic constraints in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 34(4), 521–542. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1995.1024.

53 Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2007). Nested incremental modeling in the development of computational theories: The CDP+ model of reading aloud. Psychological Review, 114(2), 273–315. doi: 10.1037/0033‐295X.114.2.273.

54 Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2010). Beyond single syllables: Large‐scale modeling of reading aloud with the Connectionist Dual Process (CDP++) model. Cognitive Psychology, 61(2), 106–151. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2010.04.001.

55 Perry, C., Zorzi, M., & Ziegler, J. C. (2019). Understanding dyslexia through personalized large‐scale computational models. Psychological Science, 30(3), 386–395. doi: 10.1177/0956797618823540.

56 Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct. William Morrow & Co.

57 Plaut, D. C., & Kello, C. T. (1999). The emergence of phonology from the interplay of speech comprehension and production: A distributed connectionist approach. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), The emergence of language (pp. 381–415). Erlbaum.

58 Plaut, D. C., McClelland, J. L., Seidenberg, M. S., & Patterson, K. (1996). Understanding normal and impaired word reading: Computational principles in quasi‐regular domains. Psychological Review, 103(1), 56–115. doi: 10.1037/0033‐295x.103.1.56.

59 Pritchard, S. C., Coltheart, M., Marinus, E., & Castles, A. (2018). A computational model of the self‐teaching hypothesis based on the dual‐route cascaded model of reading. Cognitive Science, 42(3), 722–770. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12571.

60 Pritchard, S. C., Coltheart, M., Palethorpe, S., & Castles, A. (2012). Nonword reading: Comparing dual‐route cascaded and connectionist dual‐process models with human data. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(5), 1268–1288. doi: 10.1037/a0026703.

61 Rastle, K. (2016). Visual word recognition. In G. Hickok & S. L. Small (Eds.), Neurobiology of language (pp. 255–264). Academic Press. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198568971.013.0005.

62 Rastle, K., & Coltheart, M. (1999). Serial and strategic effects in reading aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25. (2), 482–503. doi: 10.1037/0096‐1523.25.2.482.

63 Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1986). On learning the past tenses of English verbs. In J. L. McClelland, D. E. Rumelhart, & the PDP Research Group (Eds.), Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition. Volume 2 (pp. 216–271). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

64 Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J. L., & PDP Research Group (Eds.), (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Volume 1. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

65 Seidenberg, M. S. (1985). The time course of phonological code activation in two writing systems. Cognition, 19(1), 1–30. doi: 10.1016/0010‐0277(85)90029‐0.

66 Seidenberg, M. S. (1988). Cognitive neuropsychology and language: The state of the art. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 5(4), 403–426. doi: 10.1080/02643298808253267.

67 Seidenberg, M. S. (1992). Beyond orthographic depth: Equitable division of labor. In R. Frost and L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning (pp. 85–118). Elsevier.

68 Seidenberg, M. S. (2017). Language at the speed of sight: How we read, why so many cannot, and what can be done about it. New York: Basic Books.

69 Seidenberg, M. S., Cooper Borkenhagen, M., & Kearns, D. (2020). Lost in translation? Challenges in connecting reading science and educational practice. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S119–S130. doi: 10.1002/rrq.341.

70 Seidenberg, M. S., & Gonnerman, L. (2000). Explaining derivational morphology as the convergence of codes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 353–361. doi: org/10.1016/S1364‐6613(00)01515‐1.

71 Seidenberg, M. S., & MacDonald, M. C. (2018). The impact of language experience on language and reading: A statistical learning approach. Topics in Language Disorders, 38, 66–83. doi: 10.1097/TLD.0000000000000144.

72 Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96(4), 523–568. doi: 10.1037/0033‐295x.96.4.523.

73 Seidenberg, M. S., & Plaut, D. C. (2006). Progress in understanding word reading: Data fitting vs. theory building. In S. Andrews (Ed.), From ink marks to ideas: Current issues in lexical processing (pp. 25–49). Psychology Press.

74 Seidenberg, M. S., & Plaut, D. C. (2014). Quasiregularity and its discontents: The legacy of the past tense debate. Cognitive Science, 38, 1190–1228. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12147.

75 Seidenberg, M. S., Waters, G. S., Barnes, M. A., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1984). When does irregular spelling or pronunciation influence word recognition? Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23(3), 383–404. doi: 10.1016/S0022‐5371(84)90270‐6.

76 Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self‐teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55(2), 151–218. doi: 10.1016/0010‐0277(94)00645‐2.

77 Shibahara, N., Shibahara, N., Zorzi, M., Zorzi, M., Hill, M. P., Wydell, T., & Butterworth, B. (2003). Semantic effects in word naming: Evidence from English and Japanese Kanji. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 56(2), 263–286. doi: 10.1080/02724980244000369.

78 Siegelman, N., Kearns, D. M., & Rueckl, J. G. (2020). Using information‐theoretic measures to characterize the structure of the writing system: The case of orthographic‐phonological regularities in English. Behavior Research Methods, 52, 1292–1312. doi: 10.3758/s13428‐019‐01317‐y.

79 Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False‐positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366. doi: 10.1177/0956797611417632.

80 Smith, A. C., Monaghan, P., & Huettig, F. (2021). The effect of orthographic systems on the developing reading system: Typological and computational analyses. Psychological Review, 128(1), 125–159 doi: 10.1037/rev0000257.

81 Snowling, M. J., & Hayiou‐Thomas, M. E. (2006). The dyslexia spectrum: Continuities between reading, speech, and language impairments. Topics in Language Disorders, 26(2), 110–126. doi: 10.1097/00011363‐200604000‐00004.

82 Strain, E., & Herdman, C. M. (1999). Imageability effects in word naming: An individual differences analysis. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53(4), 347–359. doi: 10.1037/h0087322.

83 Strain, E., Patterson, K., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1995). Semantic effects in single‐word naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(5), 1140–1154. doi: 10.1037//0278‐7393.21.5.1140.

84 Taraban, R., & McClelland, J.L. (1987). Conspiracy effects in word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 608–631. doi: 10.1016/0749‐596X(87)90105‐7.

85 Taylor, J. S. H., Duff, F. J., Woollams, A. M., Monaghan, P., & Ricketts, J. (2015). How word meaning influences word reading. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(4), 322–328. doi: 10.1177/0963721415574980.

86 Thomas, M. S. C., & McClelland, J. L. (2008). Connectionist models of cognition. In R. Sun (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of computational psychology (pp. 23–58). Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511816772.005.

87 Treiman, R., Kessler, B., & Bick, S. (2003). Influence of consonantal context on the pronunciation of vowels: A comparison of human readers and computational models. Cognition, 88(1), 49–78. doi: 10.1016/s0010‐0277(03)00003‐9.

88 Treiman, R., Mullennix, J., Bijelac‐Babic, R., & Richmond‐Welty, E. D. (1995). The special role of rimes in the description, use, and acquisition of English orthography. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124(2), 107–136. doi: 10.1037//0096‐3445.124.2.107.

89 Waters, G. S., Seidenberg, M. S., and Bruck, M. (1984). Children's and adults' use of spelling‐sound information in three reading tasks. Memory and Cognition, 12(3), 293–305. doi: 10.3758/bf03197678.

90 Weekes, B. S. (1997). Differential effects of number of letters on word and nonword naming latency. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 50(2), 439–456. doi: 10.3758/bf03197678.

91 Werker, J. F., & Tees, R. C. (1999). Influences on infant speech processing: Toward a new synthesis. Annual Review of Psychology, 50(1), 509–535. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.509.

92 Woollams, A. M. (2005). Imageability and ambiguity effects in speeded naming: Convergence and divergence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31 (5), 878–890. doi: 10.1037/0278‐7393.31.5.878.

93 Woollams, A.M., Lambon Ralph, M.A., & Patterson, K.E. Acquired disorders of reading and writing. This volume.

94 Yang, J., McCandliss, B. D., Shu, H., & Zevin, J. D. (2009). Simulating language‐specific and language–general effects in a statistical learning model of Chinese reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 61 (2), 238–257. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2009.05.001.

95 Zevin, J. D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2006). Simulating consistency effects and individual differences in nonword naming: A comparison of current models. Journal of Memory and Language, 54 (2), 145–160.doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2005.08.002

96 Ziegler, J. C., Perry, C., & Zorzi, M. (2014). Modelling reading development through phonological decoding and self‐teaching: Implications for dyslexia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 369(1634), 20120397. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2012.0397.