References
- 1Amenta, S., & Crepaldi, D. (2012). Morphological processing as we know it: An analytical review of morphological effects in visual word identification. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1–12. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00232
- 2Baayen, R. H., Dijkstra, T., & Schreuder, R. (1997). Singulars and plurals in Dutch: Evidence for a parallel dual route model. Journal of Memory and Language, 37(1), 94–117. DOI: 10.1006/jmla.1997.2509
- 3Bertram, R., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (2000). The balance of storage and computation in morphological processing: The role of word formation type, affixal homophony, and productivity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26(2), 489–511. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.26.2.489
- 4Beyersmann, E., Casalis, S., Ziegler, J. C., & Grainger, J. (2014). Language proficiency and morpho-orthographic segmentation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(4), 1054–1061. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-014-0752-9
- 5Beyersmann, E., Cavalli, E., Casalis, S., & Colé, P. (2016). Embedded stem priming effects in prefixed and suffixed pseudowords. Scientific Studies of Reading, 20(3), 220–230. DOI: 10.1080/10888438.2016.1140769
- 6Beyersmann, E., & Grainger, J. (2017). Support from the morphological family when unembedding the stem. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 44(1), 135–142. DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000435
- 7Beyersmann, E., McCormick, S. F., & Rastle, K. (2013). Letter transpositions within morphemes and across morpheme boundaries. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(12), 1798–1819. DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2013.782326
- 8Diependaele, K., Morris, J., Serota, R. M., Bertrand, D., & Grainger, J. (2013). Breaking boundaries: Letter transpositions and morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(7), 988–1003. DOI: 10.1080/01690965.2012.719082
- 9Duñabeitia, J. A., Kinoshita, S., Carreiras, M., & Norris, D. (2011). Is morphoorthographic decomposition purely orthographic? Evidence from masked priming in the same-different task. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26, 509–529. DOI: 10.1080/01690965.2010.499215
- 10Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 116–124. DOI: 10.3758/BF03195503
- 11Grainger, J., & Beyersmann, E. (2017).
Edge-aligned embedded word activation initiates morpho-orthographic segmentation . In: Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 67, 285–317. Academic Press. DOI: 10.1016/bs.plm.2017.03.009 - 12Grainger, J., & Ziegler, J. C. (2011). A dual-route approach to orthographic processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 54. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00054
- 13Hasenäcker, J., Beyersmann, E., & Schroeder, S. (2016). Masked morphological priming in German-speaking adults and children: Evidence from response time distributions. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 929. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00929
- 14Kinoshita, S., & Norris, D. (2009). Transposed-letter priming of orthographic representations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 35, 1–18. DOI: 10.1037/a0014277
- 15Longtin, C. M., & Meunier, F. (2005). Morphological decomposition in early visual word processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 53(1), 26–41. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2005.02.008
- 16McCormick, S. F., Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2009). Adore-able not adorable? Orthographic underspecification studied with masked repetition priming. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 21(6), 813–836. DOI: 10.1080/09541440802366919
- 17Morris, J., Porter, J. H., Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2011). Effects of lexical status and morphological complexity in masked priming: An ERP study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(4–6), 558–599. DOI: 10.1080/01690965.2010.495482
- 18Niswander, E., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2000). The processing of derived and inflected suffixed words during reading. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(4–5), 389–420. DOI: 10.1080/01690960050119643
- 19Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2008). Morphological decomposition based on the analysis of orthography. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(7–8), 942–971. DOI: 10.1080/01690960802069730
- 20Rueckl, J. G., & Rimzhim, A. (2011). On the interaction of letter transpositions and morphemic boundaries. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(4–6), 482–508. DOI: 10.1080/01690965.2010.500020
- 21Taft, M. (1979). Lexical access via an orthographic code: The Basic Orthographic Syllabic Structure (BOSS). Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(1), 21–39. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90544-9
- 22Taft, M. (1987).
Morphographic processing. The BOSS re-emerges . In: Coltheart, M. (ed.), Attention and performance, XII, 265–279. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Limited. - 23Taft, M. (2006).
A localist-cum-distributed (LCD) framework for lexical processing . In: Andrews S.M.. From inkmarks to ideas: Current issues in lexical processing, 76–94. Hove, UK: Psychology Press. - 24Taft, M. (2015).
The nature of lexical representation in visual word recognition . In: Pollatsek, A., & Treiman, R. (eds.), Handbook on Reading, 99–113. New York: Oxford University Press. - 25Taft, M., & Ardasinski, S. (2006). Obligatory decomposition in reading prefixed words. The Mental Lexicon, 1(2), 183–99. DOI: 10.1075/ml.1.2.02taf
- 26Taft, M., & Kougious, P. (2004). The processing of morpheme-like units in monomorphemic words. Brain and Language, 90(1–3), 9–16. DOI: 10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00415-2
- 27Taft, M., & Krebs-Lazendic, L. (2013). The role of orthographic syllable structure in assigning letters to their position in visual word recognition. Journal of Memory & Language, 68(2), 85–97. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.10.004
- 28Taft, M., & Nguyen-Hoan, M. (2010). A sticky stick: The locus of morphological representation in the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25(2), 277–296. DOI: 10.1080/01690960903043261
- 29Taft, M., & Nillsen, C. (2013). Morphological decomposition and the transposed-letter (TL) position effect. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(7), 917–938. DOI: 10.1080/01690965.2012.679662
- 30Xu, J., & Taft, M. (2015). The effects of semantic transparency and base frequency on the recognition of English complex words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(3), 904–910. DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000052