Везде
ЭФФЕКТЫ ПРЕВОСХОДСТВА СЛОВА В ЗРИТЕЛЬНОМ ВОСПРИЯТИИ И ВНИМАНИИ
Оглавление
Аннотация Оценить Содержание публикации
Библиография Комментарии
Поделиться
QR
Метрика
ЭФФЕКТЫ ПРЕВОСХОДСТВА СЛОВА В ЗРИТЕЛЬНОМ ВОСПРИЯТИИ И ВНИМАНИИ
Аннотация
Код статьи
S0205-95920000617-5-1
Тип публикации
Статья
Статус публикации
Опубликовано
Авторы
ФАЛИКМАН МАРИЯ ВЯЧЕСЛАВОВНА 
Аннотация
На разном материале (в задаче Рейхера-Уилера, в условиях метаконтрастной маскировки, латеральной маскировки, быстрого последовательного предъявления зрительных стимулов, зрительного поиска и др.) рассматриваются классические и современные исследования эффекта превосходства слова. Анализируются возможные объяснения данного эффекта и выявляются их ограничения. Описываются новые данные, требующие теоретического осмысления.
Ключевые слова
эффект превосходства слова, зрительное восприятие, перцептивное внимание, маскировка, модели распознавания слов.
Классификатор
Дата публикации
04.01.2010
Всего подписок
2
Всего просмотров
601
Оценка читателей
0.0 (0 голосов)
Цитировать   Скачать pdf

Библиография



Дополнительные библиографические источники и материалы

    

  1. Величковский Б.М., Каптелинин В.Н. Зрительные автоматизмы и эффект превосходства слова // Вестник МГУ Сер. 14. Психология. 1983. № 1. С. 50-55.
    2. 

  2. Вундт В. Введение в психологию. М.: Космос, 1912. С. 174-191.
    3. 

  3. Гиппенрейтер Ю.Б. Деятельность и внимание // А.Н. Леонтьев и современная психология / Под ред. А.В. Запорожца и др. М.: МГУ, 1983. С. 165-177.
    4. 

  4. Каптелинин В.Н. Экспериментальные исследования зрительного восприятия слов // Вопросы психологии. 1983. № 1. С. 147-152.
    5. 

  5. Фаликман М.В. Динамика внимания в условиях быстрого последовательного предъявления зрительных стимулов: Дисс.... канд. психол. наук. М., 2001.
    6. 

  6. Фаликман М.В., Печенкова Е.В. Стратегическая регуляция решения перцептивной задачи как класс нисходящих влияний на процесс построения перцептивного образа // Первая Российская конференция по когнитивной науке: Тезисы докладов. Казань: КГУ, 2004. С. 237-239.
    7. 

  7. Bonneh Y.S., Cooperman A., Sagi D. Motion-induced blindness in normal observers // Nature. 2001. V. 411. № 6839. P. 798-801.
    8. 

  8. Bowers J.S., Bub D.N., Arguin M. A characterisation of the word superiority effect in a case of letter-by-letter surface alexia // Cognitive Neuropsychology. 1996. V. 13. № 3. P. 415-442.
    9. 

  9. Cattell J.M. The time it takes to see and name objects // Mind. 1886. V. 11. P. 63-65.
    10. 

  10. Coltheart M., Rastle K., Perry C., Langdon R.,Ziegler J. DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud // Psychological Review. 2001. V. 108. № 1. P. 204-256.
    11. 

  11. Devyatko D. Attentional modulation of motion- induced blindness: the more you look at them, the more they disappear? // Third International Conference on Cognitive Science. Abstracts. Moscow, 2008. V. 1. P. 37.
    12. 

  12. Devyatko D., Falikman M. Would letters forming a word survive motion-induced blindness? // Journ. of Vision. 2008. V. 8. № 6. P. 1017, 1017a.
    13. 

  13. Enns J.T. Object substitution and its relation to other forms of visual masking // Vision Research. 2004. V. 44. № 12. P. 1321-1331.
    14. 

  14. Enns J.T., Di Lollo V. What's new in visual masking? // Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2000. V. 4. № 9. P. 345-352.
    15. 

  15. Falikman M.V. Word preference effect and the attentional blink: Who will have the upper hand? /Hrsg. E. Van der Meer etc. 43 Kongress der Deutschen Gesellschaft fuer Psychologie. Lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers, 2002. S. 324.
    16. 

  16. Falikman M.V. "Units" of spatial and temporal attention and visual awareness // Workshop on Cognitive Science and Neurophilosophy. Abstracts. Tehran: Iranian Institute of Philosophy, 2005. P. 5-6.
    17. 

  17. Fine E.M. Does meaning matter? The impact of word knowledge on lateral masking // Optometry and Vision Science. 2001. V. 78. № 11. P. 831-838.
    18. 

  18. Fine E.M. The word-superiority effect does not depend on one's ability to identify the letter string as a word // Journ. of Vision. 2001. V. 1. № 3. P. 410, 410a.
    19. 



 


    

  1. Fine E.M. The relative benefit of word context is a constant proportion of letter identification time // Perception and Psychophysics. 2004. V. 66. № 6. P. 897-907.
    2. 

  2. Grainger J., Bouttevin S., Truc C., Bastien M., Ziegler J. Word superiority, pseudoword superiority, and learning to read: A comparison of dyslexic and normal readers // Brain and Language. 2003. V. 87. № 3. P. 1105-1114.
    3. 

  3. Grainger J., Jacobs A.M. A dual read-out model of word context effects in letter perception: Further investigations of the word superiority effect // Journ. of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1994. V. 20. № 6. P. 1158-1176.
    4. 

  4. Henderson L. A word superiority effect without orthographic assistance // The Quarterly Journ. of Experimental Psychology. 1974. V. 26. № 2. P. 301-311.
    5. 

  5. Jacobs A.M., Grainger J. Models of visual word recognition: Sampling the state of the art // Journ. of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1994. V. 20. № 6. P. 1311-1334.
    6. 

  6. Johnson N.F., Carnot M.J. On time differences in searching for letters in words and nonwords: do they emerge during the initial encoding or the subsequent scan? // Memory and Cognition. 1990. V. 18. № 1. P. 31-39.
    7. 

  7. Johnston J.C., McClelland J.L. Perception of letters in words: Seek not and ye shall find // Science. 1974. V. 184. № 4142. P. 1192-1194.
    8. 

  8. Jordan T.R., Bevan K.M. Word superiority over isolated letters: The neglected case of forward masking // Memory and Cognition, 1994. V. 22. № 2. P. 133-144.
    9. 

  9. Kahneman D., Chajczyk D. Tests of the automaticity of reading: Dilution of Stroop effects by color-irrelevant stimuli // Journ. of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1983. V. 9. № 4. P. 497-509.
    10. 

  10. Krueger L.E. Effect of frequency of display on speed of visual search // Journ. of Experimental Psychology. 1970. V. 84. № 3. P. 495-498.
    11. 

  11. Krueger L.E., Keen R.H., Rublevich B. Letter search through words and nonwords by adults and fourth- grade children // Journ. of Experimental Psychology. 1974. V. 102. № 5. P. 845-849.
    12. 

  12. Laszlo S., Federmeier K.D. The acronym superiority effect // Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. 2007. V. 14. № 6. P. 1158-1163.
    13. 

  13. Lйtй В., Ducrot S. Visuo-attentional processing by dyslexic readers on the Reicher-Wheeler task // Current Psychology Letters. 2008. V. 24. № 1. P. 25-39.
    14. 

  14. Luiga I. Higher-level processing in substitution and metacontrast masking: interaction between mask and target. Master's thesis. Tartu, 2003.
    15. 

  15. Luiga I., Bachmann T., Põder E. Metacontrast masking of single letters in words and trigrams with varying loads on attention // Perception. 2002. V. 31, Suppl. P. 79.
    16. 

  16. Marchetti F.M., Mewhort D.J.K. On the word-superiority effect // Psychological Research. 1986. V. 48. № 1. P. 23-35.
    17. 

  17. Martin C.D., Nazir T., Thierry G., Paulignan Y., Demonet J.F. Perceptual and lexical effects in letter identification: an event-related potential study of the word superiority effect // Brain Research. 2006. V. 1098. № 1. P. 153-160.
    18. 

  18. Mattingly I.G., Xu Y. Word superiority in Chinese // Advances in the Study of Chinese Language Processing / Eds. H.-W. Chang et al. 1994. V. 1. P. 101-111.
    19. 

  19. McCann R.S., Folk C.L., Johnston J.C. The role of spatial attention in visual word processing // Journ. of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1992. V. 18. № 4. P. 1015-1029.
    20. 

  20. McClelland J.L. Preliminary letter identification in the perception of words and nonwords // Journ. of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1976. V. 2. № 1. P. 80-91.
    21. 

  21. McClelland J.L. Letter and configuration information in word identification // Journ. of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 1977. V. 16. P. 137-150.
    22. 

  22. McClelland J.L., Johnston J.C. The role of familiar units in perception of words and nonwords // Perception and Psychophysics. 1977. V. 22. № 3. P. 249-261.
    23. 

  23. McClelland J., Rumelhart D. An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings // Psychological Review. 1981. V. 88. № 5. P. 375-407.
    24. 

  24. Mewhort D.J.K., Johns E.E. Some tests of the interactive-activation model for word identification // Psychological Research. 1988. V. 50. № 3. P. 135-147.
    25. 

  25. Pantyushkov A.M., Horowitz T.S., Falikman M.V. Is there word superiority in visual search? // Third International Conference on Cognitive Science. Abstracts. Moscow, 2008. V. 1. P. 124-125.
    26. 

  26. Pechenkova E.V. Effect of schemata on temporal order perception ofmultiple visual items // Third International Conference on Cognitive Science. Abstracts. Moscow, 2008. V. 1. P. 127-128.
    27. 

  27. Potter M.C., Nieuwenstein M., Strohminger N. Whole report versus partial report in RSVP sentences // Journ. of Memory and Language. 2008. V. 58. № 4. P. 907-915.
    28. 

  28. Prinzmetal W. The word-superiority effect does not require a T-scope // Perception and psychophysics. 1992. V. 51. № 5. P. 473-484.
    29. 

  29. Prinzmetal W., Silvers B. The word without the tachistoscope // Perception and psychophysics. 1994. V. 55. № 3. P. 296-312.
    30. 

  30. Raymond J.E., Shapiro K.L., Arnell K.M. Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: An attentional blink? // Journ. of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1992. V. 18. № 3. P. 849-860.
    31. 

  31. Reicher G.M. Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material // Journl of Experimental Psychology. 1969. V. 81. № 2. P. 275-280.
    32. 

  32. Rumelhart D.E., McClelland J.L. An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 2. The context enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model // Psychological Review. 1982. V. 89. № 1. P. 60-94.
    33. 

  33. Ruz M., Nobre A.C. Attention modulates initial stages of visual word processing // Journ. of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2008. V. 20. № 9. P. 1727-1736.
    34. 

  34. Salvemini A.V., Stewart A.L., Purcell D.G., Pinkham R.S. A word-superiority effect in the presence of foveal load // Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1998. V. 86. № 3. Pt. 2. P. 1311-1319.
    35. 

  35. Sieroff E. Perception of visual letter strings in a case of left neglect: manipulation of the word form // Brain and Language. 1991. V. 41. № 4. P. 565-589.
    36. 



 


    

  1. Sieroff E., Posner M. Cueing spatial attention during processing of words and letter strings in normals // Cognitive Neuropsychology. 1988. V. 5. № 4. P. 451-472.
    2. 

  2. Sieroff E., Pollatsek A., Posner M. Recognition of visual letter strings following injury to the posterior visual spatial system // Cognitive Neuropsychology. 1988. V. 5. № 4. P. 427-449.
    3. 

  3. Solman R.T. Direct comparison of masking and halfletter word-superiority effects // The American Journ. of Psychology. 1988. V. 101. № 4. P. 505-513.
    4. 

  4. Solman R.T. Temporal separation of two part-letter arrays and size changes in a nonmasking word-superiority effect // Perception. 1987. V. 16. № 5. P. 655-669.
    5. 

  5. Solman R.T., May J.G., Schwartz B.D. The word superiority effect: A study using parts of letters // Journ. of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1981. V. 7. № 3. P. 552-559.
    6. 

  6. Stolz J., McCann R. S. Re-attending to the role of spatial attention in visual word processing // Journ. of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 2000. V. 26. № 4. P. 1320-1331.
    7. 

  7. Stroop J.R. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions // Journ. of Experimental Psychology. 1935. V. 18. № 6. P. 643-662.
    8. 

  8. Wheeler D.D. Processes in word recognition // Cognitive Psychology. 1970. V. 1. № 1. P. 59-85.
    9. 

  9. Wolfe J. Visual Search // Attention / Ed. H. Pashler. London, UK: University College London Press, 1998. P. 13-73.
    10.

Комментарии

Сообщения не найдены

Написать отзыв
Перевести