HU Credits: 3

Degree/Cycle: 2nd degree (Master)

Responsible Department: Education

Semester: 1st Semester

Teaching Languages: Hebrew

Campus: Mt. Scopus

Course/Module Coordinator: Avital Deutsch

Coordinator Email: avital.deutsch1@mail.huji.ac.il

Coordinator Office Hours: by appointment in advance

Teaching Staff:
Prof. Avital Deutsch

Course/Module description:
This course will discuss the cognitive mechanisms involved in written word recognition. The discussion will focus mainly on single-word recognition and how written-word recognition is modulated by language-specific characteristics

Course/Module aims:
The aim of the course is to introduce the main models for written-word recognition via the empirical literature from which these models stem. Another aim is to train the students to read empirical literature in the cognitive domain of reading.

Learning outcomes - On successful completion of this module, students should be able to:
Familiarity with the main models for single written words recognition, and with the main factors influencing the process.

Familiarity with the main research methods in the cognitive study of single written words recognition.
Basic ability to deal with experimental literature in the field of reading.

Attendance requirements(%):
100%

Teaching arrangement and method of instruction: The discussion will be based on teacher presentations and students' reading of experimental literature describing the behavioral phenomena that lead to the various theoretical models of reading.

Course/Module Content:
Introduction
- The development of writing systems: logographic, syllabic, alphabetical.
- The process of reading: What is the essence of written word recognition? What is the distinction between written-word recognition in beginning and skilled readers? Present the Word Superiority effect.
Written word identification – a comprehensive discussion:
- Visual word recognition: Introducing connectionist models of reading. Localist versus distributed approach.
- Lexical access: Introducing the dual-route model (with direct and indirect routes) versus one-route feed-forward and/or feedback connectionist models. The presentation of the various models is based on empirical findings demonstrating the well-documented factors that affect written word recognition: phonological and orthographic processing, word frequency, orthographic regularity, orthographic consistency, size of orthographic neighborhood, and orthographic depth. The discussion will include the experimental paradigms commonly used in the field.
- The time course of deciphering phonological structure in written-word recognition.
- Identification of orthographic structure: implicit learning.
- Discussion of the experimental paradigm of monitoring readers’ eye movements as a tool for exploring the reading process. Introducing the E-Z-reader model of eye movements in reading. Discussing the role of attention in written-word recognition within a sentential context – serial versus parallel models for the allocation of attention.
-A comprehensive discussion of the influence of orthographic depth on reading and the grain size hypothesis via the example of reading pointed and unpointed Hebrew script.
-Discussion of the theoretical implications of the basic research into written-word identification for teaching reading.
-The relation between written word identification and spelling.
- The role of morphological units in written word recognition – a comprehensive discussion of reading Hebrew.
-

Required Reading:

Reading Part I: Fundamentals in reading/ Prof. Avital Deutsch (2024-2025)

Reading requirements include selected items from the bibliography list, about one item per week. The exact item required for each lecture will be announced at the end of each lecture pending on course progress.


Apel, J. K., Henderson, J. M., & Ferreira, F. (2012). Targeting regressions: Do readers pay attention to the left? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 1108-113.

Arciuli, J. & Simpson, I. C. (2012). Statistical learning is related to reading ability in children and adults. Cognitive Science, 36, 286-304.

Ashby, J., Treiman, R. Kessler, B. and Rayner, K. (2006). Vowel Processing During Silent Reading: Evidence From Eye Movements. Journal of experimental psychology: Learning, memory and cognition, 32 (2), 416-424.
Bernet, I., & Perfetti, C. A. (1995). A rose is a REEZ: the two-cycles model of phonology assembly in reading English. Psychological Review, 102, 146-184.

Bogaerts, L., Frost, R., and Christiansen, M. H. (2020). Integrating statistical learning into cognitive science. Journal of Memory and Language, 115.

Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2005). Discontinuous morphology in time: Incremental masked priming in Arabic. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 207-260

Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2011). Productivity and priming: Morphemic decomposition in Arabic. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26, 624-652.

Chen, L., Perfetti, C. A., Fang, X., Chang, L.-Y., & Fraundorf, S. (2019). Reading Pinyin activates sublexcial character orthography for skilled Chinese readers. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 34(6), 736–746. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1578891

Christianson, K., Johnson, R., L., & Rayner, K. (2005). Letter transposition within and across morphemes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1327-1339.

Clifton, C., Ferreira, F., Henderson, J. M., Inhoff, A., W., Liversedge, S., P., Reichle, E., D., and Schotter, E., R. (2016). Eye movements in reading and information processing: Keith Rayner's 40 year legacy. Journal of Memory and Language, 86, 1-19.

Colombo, L. (2000). The assembly of phonology in Italian and English: Consonants and Vowels. In: A. Kennedy, R. Radach, D. Heller, & Pynte J. (Eds.) Reading as a Perceptual Process Amsterdam: Elsevier. (pp. 377-398).

*Coltherat, M. (2005). Modeling reading: The dual-route approach. In: M. J. Snowling, and C. Hulmes (Eds.) The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 6-23). Oxford UK: Blackwell Publishing.

Conrad, M., Carrerias, M., Tamm, S., & Jacobs, A. M. (2009). Syllables and Bigrams: Orthographic Redundancy and Syllabic Units Affect Visual Word Recognition at Different Processing Levels. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human, Perception and Performance, 35, 461-479.

Davis, C., J. (2010). SOLAR versus SERIOL revisited. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22, 695-724.

Deutsch, A., Frost, R., & Forster, K. (1998). Verbs and nouns are organized and accessed differently in the mental lexicon: Evidence from Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 24, 1238-1255.

Deutsch, A., Frost, R., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2000). Early morphological effects in word recognition in Hebrew: Evidence from parafoveal preview benefit. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 487-506.

Deutsch, A., Frost, R., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2005). Morphological parafoveal preview benefit effects in reading: Evidence from Hebrew. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 341-371. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960444000115.

Deutsch, A., Velan, H., Merzbach, Y., and Michaly, T. (2021). The dependence of root extraction in a non-concatenated morphology on the word-specific orthographic context. Journal of Memory and Language, 116, 104182 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2020.104182

Deutsch, A., Velan, H., and Michaly, T. (2018). Decomposition in a non-concatenated morphological structure involves more than just the roots: Evidence from fast priming. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 7, 85-92. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1080/17470218.2016.1250788

Diependaele, K., Ziegler, J., Grainger, J. (2010). Fast phonology and the bi-modal interactive activation model. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22, 764-778.

Frisson, S., Bélanger, & Rayner (2014). Phonological and orthographic overlap effects in fast and masked priming. The Quarterly Journal of experimental Psychology, 67, 1742-1767.

Frost, R. (1994). Prelexical and postlexical strategies in reading; evidence from a deep and
a shallow orthography. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 20, 116-129.

Frost, R. (1995). Phonological computation and missing vowels: Mapping lexical involvement
in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 398-
408.

Frost, R. (1998). Toward a strong phonological theory of visual word recognition: True issues and false trials. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 71-99.

Frost, R. (2006). Becoming literate in Hebrew; the grain size hypothesis and Semitic orthographic systems. Developmental Science, 9, 439-440.

Frost, R. (2012). Towards a universal model of reading. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35, 263-279.
*Frost, R. (2015). Cross-linguistic perspectives on letter-order processing: Empirical findings and theoretical considerations. In In A. Pollatsek & R. Treiman (Eds.) The Oxford handbook of reading (pp.88-98). New_York, NY, US: Oxford University Press
Frost, R., Ahissar, M., Gotesman, R., Tayeb, S. (2003). Are phonological effects fragile? The effect of luminance and exposure duration on form priming and phonological priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 48 (2), 346-378.
Frost, R., Deutsch, A., & Forster, K. (2000). Decomposing morphologically complex words in a nonlinear morphology. Journal of Experimental psychology: Learning, Memory, & cognition, 26, 751-765.

Frost, R., Forster, K. I., & Deutsch, A. (1997). What can we learn from morphology of Hebrew? A masked priming investigation of morphological representation. Journal of Experimental psychology: Learning, Memory, & cognition, 23, 829-856.

Frost, R., Katz, L., & Bentin, S. (1987). Startegies for visual word recognition and
orthographical depth: A multilingual comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Human, Perception and Performance, 13, 104-115.

Frost, R., Kugler, T., Deutsch, A., & Forster, K. I. (2005). Orthographic Structure Versus Morphological Structure: Principles of Lexical Organization in Given Language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1293-1326.

Frost, R., & Yogev. O. (2001). Orthographic and phonological computation in visual word recognition: Evidence from backward masking in Hebrew. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 8, 524-530.

Forster, K. I., & Chambers, S. M. (1973). Lexical access and naming time. Journal of Verbal
Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 627-635.

Glushko, R. (1979). The organization and activation of orthographic knowledge in reading
aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human, Perception and Performance, 5, 674-691.

Gronau, N. & Frost R. (1997). Prelexical phonologic computation in deep orthography: Evidence from backward masking in Hebrew. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 107-112.

Harm, M. W., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meaning of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 11, 662-720.

*Halderman , L. K., Ashby, J., Perfetti, C. A. (2012). An early and integral role in
identifying words. In J. S. Adelman (Ed.) Current issues in the psychology of language. Visual word recognition: Vol. 1. Models and Methods, Orthography and Phonology (pp. 207-228). Hove, England: Psychology Press.

Jared, D.(2002). Spelling-sound consistency and regularity effects in word naming.
Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 723-750.

Jordan, T. R., McGowan, V. A., & Paterson, K. B. (2012). Reading with a filtered fovea: The influence of visual quality at the point of fixation during reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 1078-1084.

Jouravlev, O. and Jared, D. (2018). Cross-script orthographic and phonological preview benefits. Quarterly journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 11-19.
*Kessler, B. and Treiman R.) 2015). Writing systems: Their properties and implications for reading. In A. Pollatsek & R. Treiman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of reading (pp.10-25). New_York, NY, US: Oxford University Press
Kuperman, V., Bar-On, A., Bertram, R., Boshra, R., Deutsch, A., Kyröläinen, A.-J., Mathiopoulou, B., Oralova, G., & Protopapas, A. (2021). Prevalence of spelling errors affects reading behavior across languages. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 150(10), 1974–1993. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001038
Kuperman, V., Drieghe, D., Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2013). How strongly do word reading times and lexical decision times correlate? Combining data from eye movement corpora and megastudies, The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66:3, 563-580,
Lee, H. W., Rayner. K., Pollatsek, A. (2001). The relative contribuition of consonants and vowels to word identification during reading. Journal of memory and language, 44 (2), 189-205.

Lee, H.-W., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2002). The processing of consonants and vowels in reading: Evidence from the fast priming paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 766–772. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196333

Lelonkiewicz, J. R., Ktori, M., and Crepaldi, D. (2020). Morphemes as letter chunks: Discovering affixes through visual regularities, Journal of Memory and Language, 115, Article 104152115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2020.104152

Lesch, M. F., & Pollatsek, A. (1993). Automatic access of semantic information by
phonological codes in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory and Cognition, 19, 285-294.

Li, X., Bicknell, K., Liu, P., Wei, W., & Rayner, K. (2014). Reading is fundamentally similar across writing systems: A systematic characterization of how words and characters influence eye-movements in Chinese reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2430, 895-913.

Liu, Y., Yu, S, and Reichle, E. (2019). The Dynamic adjustmen of Saccades during Chinese reading: Evidence from Eye Movements andSimulations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 45, 535-543. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000595

Lukatela, G., & Turvey, M. T. (1994). Visual lexical access is initially phonological: 2. Evidence from phonological priming by homophones and pseudohomophones. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 331-353.

*Lupker, S., J. (2005). Visual word recognition: theories and findings. In: M. J. Snowling, and C. Hulmes (Eds.) The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 39-60). Oxford UK: Blackwell Publishing.

Marinelli, C., Romani, C., Burani, C., Zoccolotti, P. (2015). Spelling acquisition in English and Italian: A cross-linguistic study. Frontiers in Psychology, http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01843/full

Marcolini,S., Traficante, D., Zoccolotti, P., and Burani, C. (2011). Word frequency modulates morpheme-based reading in poor and skilled Italian readers. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 513-532.

Marshall, J. C., & Newcombe, F. (1973). Patterns of paralexia: A Psycholinguistic approach. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2, 175-199.

McClelland, J. L., & Rumelthart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context
effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88,
375-407.

Meade, G. (2020). The role of phonology during visual word learning in adults: An integrative review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 27(1), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01647-0.

Miellet, S., & Sparrow, L. (2004). Phonological codes are assembled before word fixation: Evidence from boundary paradigm in sentence reading. Brain and Language, 90, 299-310.

Millet, S., O’Donnell & Sereno (2009). Parafoveal Magnification: Visual acuity does not modulate the perceptual span. Psychological Science, 20, 721-728.

Milledge, S. V., Blythe, H. I., Liversedge, S. P. (2021). Parafoveal pre-processing in children reading English: The important of external letters. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 28, 197-208.

Mousikou, P. & Beyersmann, E., Ktori, M., Javourey‐Drevet, L., Crepaldi, D., Ziegler, J. C., Grainger, J., & Schroeder, S. (2020). Orthographic consistency influences morphological processing in reading aloud: Evidence from a cross‐linguistic study. Developmental Science, 23(6), Article e12952. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12952

New, B., and Nazzi, T. (2014). The time course of consonants and vowel processing during word recognition. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29, 147-157.

Nishibayashi, L.-L., & Nazzi, T. (2016). Vowels, then consonants: Early bias switch in recognizing segmented word forms. Cognition, 155, 188–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.07.003

Paap, K. R., Newsome, S. L., McDonald, J. E., & Achvaneveldt, R. W. (1982). An
activation-verification model for letter and word recognition: The word superiority effect.
Psychological Review, 89, 573-594.

Perea, M., Abu Mallouh, R., & Carreiras, M. (2010). The search of an input coding scheme: Transposed-letter priming in Arabic. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 17, 375-380.

Perea, M., & Lupker, S. J. (2004). Can CANISO activate CASINO? Transposed-letter similarity effects with nonadjacent letter positions. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 231-246.

Perfetti, C. A., Bell, L. C. (1991). Phonemic activation during the first 40 ms of word
recognition: Evidence from backward masking and priming. Journal of Memory and
Language, 30, 473-485.

Perfetti, C. A., Bell, L. C., & Delaney, S. M. (1988). Automatic (prelexical) phonetic
activation in silent word reading: Evidence from backward masking. Journal of Memory and
Language, 27, 59-70.


Perfetti, C. A., & Tan, L. H. (1998). The time course of graphic, phonological, and semantic activation in chinese character identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learnng, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 101-118.

Perfetti, C. A., & Zhang, S. (1991). Phonemic processes in reading Chineses words. Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 1, 633-643.

*Plaut, D., C. (2005). Connectionsit approaches to modeling. In: M. J. Snowling, and C. Hulmes (Eds.) The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 24-38). Oxford UK: Blackwell Publishing.

Pollatsek, A., Lesch, M., Morris, R., & Rayner, K. (1992). Phonological codes are used in
integrating information across saccades in word identification and reading. Journal of
Experimental Psychology; Human, Perception and Performance, 18, 148-162.

*Pollatsek, A., Rayner, K., & Lee, H. (2000). Phonological coding in word perception and reading. In: A. Kennedy, R. Radach, D. Heller, & Pynte J. (Eds.) Reading as a Perceptual Process Amsterdam: Elsevier. (pp. 399-426).

Pollatsek, A., Tan, L. H., & Rayner, K. (2000). The role of phonological codes in integrating information across saccadic eye-movements in Chinese character identification. Journal of
Experimental Psychology; Human, Perception and Performance, 26, 607-633.

Qu, Q. and Dmian, M., F (2020). An electrophysiological analysis of the time course of phonological and orthographic encoding in written word production. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 35(3), 360–373.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1659988

Racine, I., Burki, & Spinelli (2014). The implication of spelling and frequency in the recognition of phonological variants: evidence from pre-readers and readers. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 29, 893-898.

Radach, R., & Kennedy, A. (2012). Eye movements in reading: Some theoretical context. The quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 429-452.

Rastle, K. and Brysbaert, M. (2006). Masked phonological priming effects in English:Are they real? Do they matter? Cognitive Psychology 53, 97–145.

Rastle, K., D., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Tuler, L. K. (2000). Morphological and semantic effects in visual word recognition: A time-course study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 507-537.

*Rayner, K., Juhasz, B., J., and Pollatsek, A. (2005). Eye movements during reading. In: M. J. Snowling, and C. Hulmes (Eds.) The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 79-98). Oxford UK: Blackwell Publishing.

Rayner, K., Pollatsek, A., & Binder, K. (1998). Phonological codes and eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memoey, & Cognition, 24, 476-497.

Rayner, K., Schotter, E., R., Masson, M. E., Potter, M., & Treiman, R. (2016). So much to read, so little time: How do we read, and can spped reading help? Psychological Science, 17, 4-34.

Rayner, K., Sereno, S. C., Lesch, M. F., & Pollatsek, A. (1995). Phonological codes are automatically activated during reading. Psychological Science, 6, 26-32.

Reichle, E. D., Liversedge, S. P., Pollatsek, A., Rayner, K. (2009). Encoding multipl;e words simultaneously in reading is implausible. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13 (3), 115-119.

Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2006). E–Z Reader: A cognitive-control, serial-attention model of eye-movement behavior during reading. Cognitive Systems Research, 7, 4-22.

Reichle, E., Pollatsek, A.k, Fisher, D. L. & Rayner, K. (1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review, 105, 125-157.

Reichle, E. D., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2003). The E_Z Reader model of eye movement control in reading: Comparison to other models. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26, 445-476.

Reicher, G. M. (1996). Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus
material. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 275-280.

Rubenstein, H., Lewis, S. S., & Rubenstein, M. A. (1971). Evidence for phonemic recoding
in visual word recognition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10, 645-657.

Rueckl, J. G., Paz-Alonso, P. M., Molfese, P. J., Kuo, W.-J., Bick, A., Frost, S. J., . . . Frost, R. (2015). Universal brain signature of proficient reading: Evidence from four contrasting languages. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112, 15510-15515.

Rumelthart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1982). An interactive activation model of context
effects in letter perception: Part 2. Psychological Review, 89, 60-94.

Sánchez-Gutiérrez, C., & Rastle, K. (2013). Letter transpositions within and across morphemic boundaries: Is there a cross-language difference? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 988-996.

Schoonabert, S. G., and Grainger, J. (2004). Leeter position coding in printed word perception: effects of repeated and transposed letters. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19(3), 333-367.

Schooter, E., R., and Rayner, K. (2015). The work of the eyes during reading. In A. Pollatsek and R. Treiman (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Reading (pp. 44-59). Oxford, University Press.

Schmalz, E., Marinus, M., Coltheart, A., & Castles, A. (2015). Getting to the bottom of orthographic depth. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 1614-1629.

Schubert, T. M., Cohen, T., & Fischer-Baum, S. (2020). Reading the written language environment: Learning orthographic structure from statistical regularities. Journal of Memory and Language, 114, Article 104148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2020.104148

Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word
recognition. Psychological Review, 523-568.

Seidenberg, M. S., Petersen, A., MacDonald, M., & Plaut, D. C. (1996). Pseudohomophone
effects and models of word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and Cognition, 22, 48-62.

Seidenberg, M. S., Waters, G., Barnes, M. A. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1984). When does irregular spelling or pronunciation influence word recognition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,23, 383-404.

Share, D. L., & Bar-On, A. (2018). Learning to read a Semitic abjad: The triplex model of Hebrew reading development. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 51(5), 444–453. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219417718198

Shen, X. R., Damian, M., F., & Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H. (2013). Abstract graphemic representations support preparation of handwritten responses. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 69-84.

Siegelman, N., Rueckl, J. G., Lo, J. C. M., Kearns, D. M., Morris, R. D., & Compton, D. L. (2022). Quantifying the regularities between orthography and semantics and their impact on group- and individual-level behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 48(6), 839–855. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001109

Siegelman, N., Rueckl, J. G., Steacy, L. M., Frost, S. J., van den Bunt, M., Zevin, J. D., Seidenberg, M. S., Pugh, K. R., Compton, D. L., & Morris, R. D. (2020). Individual differences in learning the regularities between orthography, phonology and semantics predict early reading skills. Journal of Memory and Language, 114, Article 104145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2020.104145

Smolka, E., Koml'osi, S. & Rösler, F. (2009). When semantics means less than morphology: The processing of German prefixed verbs. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24, 337-375.

Smolka, E., Preller, K., H., & Eulitz, C. (2014). ‘Verstehen’ (‘understand’) primes ‘sthen’ (‘stand’): Morphological structure overrides semantic compositionality in the lexical representation og German complex verbs. Journal of Memory and Language, 72, 16-36.

Snell, J., & Grainger, J. (2019). Readers are parallel processors. Trends in Cognitive Science, 23, 537-546 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.04.006

Snell, J., van Leipsig, S., Grainger, J., and Meeter, M. (2018). OB1-Reader: A model of word recognition and eye movements un text reading. Psychological Review, 125(6), 969-984.

Stevens, P. and Plaut, D. (2022). From decomposition to distributed theories of morphological processing in reading. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. 29, 1673-1702.

Stinchcombe, E. J., Lupker, S., J., Davis, C. J. (2012). Transpossed-letter priming effects with masked subset primes: A re-examination of the “relative position priming constraint. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27(4), 475-499.

Stone, G. O., & Van Orden, G. C. (1994). Building a resonance framework for word recognition using design and system principles. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human, Perception and Performance, 36, 337-359.

Tan, L. H., & Perfetti, C. (1997). Visual Chineses character recognition: Does phonological
information mediate access to meaning? Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 41-57.

Treiman, R., Seidenberg, M. S., & Kessler, B. (2015). Influences on spelling: evidence from homophones. Langubgage, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30, 544-554.

Ulicheva, A. et al. (2022). Effects of phonological features on reading-aloud latencies: A cross linguistic comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 48, 1348-1362.
Van-Orden, G. C. (1987). A rows is a rose: Spelling, sound and reading. Memory &
Cognition, 15, 181-198.

Van-Orden, G. C., Pennington, B. F., & Stone, G. O. (1990). Word identification in reading
and the promise of subsymbolic psycholinguistcs. Psychological Review, 97, 488-522.

Velan, H., Deutsch, A., & Frost, R. (2013). The flexibility of Letter-Position Flexibility: Evidence from eye movements in reading Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human, Perception and Performance, 39, 1143-1152.

Velan, H., & Frost, R. (2007). Cambridge University Vs. Hebrew University: The impact of letter transposition on reading English and Hebrew. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14(5), 913-918.

Velan, H., & Frost, R. (2009). Letter-transposition effects are not universal: The impact of transposing letters in Hebrew. Journal of Memory & Language, 61(3), 285-302.

Velan, H., & Frost, R. (2011). Words with and without internal structure: what determines the nature of orthographic processing. Cognition, 118, 141-156.

Velan, H., Frost, R., Deutsch, A., & Plaut, D. (2005). The processing of root morphemes in Hebrew: Contrasting localist and distributed accounts. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 169-206.

White, S., J., Johnson, R. L., Liversedge, S. P., & Rayner, K. (2008). Eye movements when reading transposed text: The importance of word-beginning letters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human, Perception and Performance, 34, 1261-1276.

Whitney, C. (2001). How the brain encodes the order of letters in a printed word: The SERIOL model and selective literature review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 221-243.

*Yap, M., J., and Balota, D. A. (2015). Visual word recognition. In A. Pollatsek and R. Treiman (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Reading (pp. 26-43). Oxford, University Press.
Yarkoni, T., Balota, D., & Yap., M. (2008). Moving beyond Coltheart’s N: A new measure of orthographic similarity. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15, 971-979.

Zevin, J. D. and Seidenberg M. S. (2006) Simulating consistency effects and individual differences in nonword naming: A comparison of current models, Journal of Memory and Language, 5 (2), 145-160.

Ziegler, J. C., Ferrand, L., Jacobs, A. M., Rey, A., & Grainger, J. (2000). Visual and phonological codes in letter and word recognition: Evidence from incremental priming. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 53, 671-692.

Ziegler, J., & Goswami, U. C. (2005). Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia and skilled reading across languages; a psycholinguistic grain size theory. Psychological Bulletin, 13, 3-29.

Ziegler, J., & Goswami, U. C. (2006). Becoming literate in different languages; similar problems, different solutions. Developmental Science, 9, 429-436.

Additional Reading Material:
Students are encouraged to read the following book chapters which give overview on the main topics to be discussed in class:
Chapters 2, 3, 4 & 7 from
A. Pollatsek and R. Treiman (Eds.)The Oxford Handbook of Reading, 2015, Oxford University Press. (Electronic Book).
The specific chapters are detailed in the reference list and marked by asterisk.

Grading Scheme :
Computerized Exam - At the cluster % 85
Active Participation / Team Assignment 5 %
Attendance / Participation in Field Excursion 10 %

Additional information:
none