This article applies to:
Experiment Author: Glushko, R.J., Adapted from STEP and used with permission of Brian MacWhinney
Participants are given a set of words and nonwords then asked to pronounce them. Some of the words are pronounced regularly and some are exception words, and some of the nonwords have only one letter different from the exception words. The original study found that the nonwords that resemble exception words are more difficult to pronounce than nonwords that look regular.
The participant is presented with 4 blocks of trials. Two of the blocks use letter strings that form words and two blocks form letter strings that are non-words. Words and non-words are further categorized as being regular or irregular words, e.g., 'COMB' is an irregular word due to the pronunciation of the 'B'. Each block is repeated six times. There are 43 trials per block. During each trial, the participant is presented with the current trial number, followed by a fixation, followed by a letter string. The participant is to pronounce the letter string as rapidly but as normally as possible and press the spacebar when finished. The RT of the press of the spacebar is then presented.
Glushko, R.J. (1979). The organization and activation of orthographic knowledge in reading aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5,674-691.
Experiment Abstract or Original Experiment Abstract
"Exception" words like HAVE, with irregular spelling-to-sound correspondences, take longer to read aloud than words like HAZE, with regular correspondences. "Exception pseudowords" like TAVE, which resemble irregular words, suffer a similar penalty in pronunciation latency compared to "regular pseudowords" like TAZE, which resemble regular words. Finally, "regular but inconsistent" words like WAVE, which have regular spelling-to-sound structure but which resemble exception words, take longer to pronounce than "regular and consistent" words like WADE. These results refute current claims that words are read aloud by retrieving a single pronunciation from memory and that pseudowords are pronounced by using abstract spelling-to-sound rules. Instead, it appears that words and pseudowords are pronounced using similar kinds of orthographic and phonological knowledge: the pronunciations of words that share orthographic features with them, and specific spelling-to-sound rules for multiletter spelling patterns. The traditional classification of words as regular and exception should be supplemented by a classification that incorporates the "consistency" or "inconsistency" of the orthographic knowledge activated in the course of pronouncing a word.
Works Cited by the Experiment
Baker, R., & Smith, P. A psycholinguistic studey of English stress assignment rules. Language and Speech, 1976, 19, 9-27.
Baron, J. Mechanisms for pronouncing printed words: Use and acquisition. In D. LaBerge & S. Samuels (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Perception and comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1977. (a)
Baron, J. What we might know about orthographic rules. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance VI, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1977. (b)
Baron, J. Orthographic and word-specific mechanisms in children's reading of words. Child Development, 1979, 50, 60-72.
Baron, J., & Strawson, C. Use of orthographic and word-specific knowledge in reading words aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1976, 2, 386-393.
Bradshaw, J. Three interrelated problems in reading: A review. Memory & Cognition, 1975, 3, 123-134.
Brooks, L. Non-analytic correspondences and pattern in word pronunciation. In J. Requin (Ed.), Attention and Performance VII. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1977. (a)
Brooks, L. Visual pattern in fluent word identification. In A. Reber & D. Scarborough (eds.), Toward a psychology of reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1977. (b)
Brooks, L. Nonanalytic concept formation and memory for instances. In E. Rosh & B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization. Potomac, MD: Erlbaum, 1978.
Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row, 1968.
Coltheart, M. Lexical access in simple reading tasks. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Strategies of information processing. London: Academic Press, 1978.
Forster, K., & Chambers, S. Lexical access and naming time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1973, 12, 627-635.
Frederiksen, J., & Kroll, J. Spelling and sound: Approaches to the internal lexicon. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1976, 2, 361-379.
Gough, P., & Cosky, M. One second of reading again. In N. Castellan, D. Pisoni, & G. Potts (eds.), Cognitive theory (Vol. 2). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1977.
Hawkins, H., Reicher, G., Rogers, M., & Peterson, L. Flexible coding in word recognition. Journla of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1976, 2, 380-385.
Kucera, H., & Francis, W. Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press, 1967.
Marshall, J. Neuropsychological aspects of orthographic representation. In R. Wales & E. Walker (Eds.), New approaches to language mechanisms. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1976.
Mason, M. From print to sound in mature readers as a function of reader ability and two forms of orthographic regularity. Memory & Cognition, 1978, 6, 568-581.
Meyer, D., Schvaneveldt, R., & Ruddy, M. Functions of graphemic and phonemic codes in visual word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 1974, 2, 309-321.
Ohala, J. Experimental historical phonology. In J. Anderson & C. Jones (Eds.), Historical lingusitics II: Theory and description in phonology. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1974.
Patterson, K., & Marcel, A. Aphasia, dyslexia, and the phonolgical coding of written words. Quarterly Journla of Experimental Psychology, 1977, 29, 307-318.
Saffran, E., & Marin, O. Reading without phonology: Evidence from aphasia. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1977, 29, 515-525.
Schane, S. Rule breaking in English spelling: A study of final E. In P. Hopper (Ed.), Studies in descriptive and historical linguistics: Festschrift for Winfred P. Lehmann. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1977.
Smith, P., & Baker, R. The influence of English spelling patterns on pronuniciation. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1975, 15, 267-285.
Spoehr, K. Phonological encoding in visual word recognition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1978, 17, 127-141.
Spoehr, K., & Smith, E. The role of orthographic and phonotactic ruels in perceiving letter patterns. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1975, 1, 21-34.
Stanovich, K., & Bauer, D. Experiments on the spelling-to-sound regularity effect in word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 1978, 6, 410-415.
Steinberg, D., & Krohn, R. The psychological validity of Chomsky and Halle's vowel shift rule. In E. Koerner, J. Odmark, & J. Shaw (Eds.), The transformation-generative paradigm and modern linguistic theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1975.
Theios, J., & Muise, J. The word identification proceess in reading. In N. Castellan, D. Pisoni, & G. Potts (Eds.), Cognitive theory (Vol. 2). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1977.
Venezky, R. English orthography: Its graphical structure and its relation ot sound. Reading Research Quarterly, 1967, 2, 75-105.
Venezky, R. The structure of English orthography. The Hague: Mouton, 1970.
Wijk, A. Rules of pronunciation for the English language. London: Oxford University Press, 1966.
Zurif, E., & Caramazza, A. Psycholinguistic studies in aphasia: Studies in syntax and semantics. In H. Whitaker & H.A. Whitaker (Eds.), Studies in neurolinguistics (Vol. 1). New York: Academic Press, 1976.
STEP: Facilitation in Recognizing Pairs of Words 
STEP: An Interactive Activation Model of Context Effects in Letter Perception 
Please sign in to leave a comment.