4.7 Article

The role of orthographic and phonological processing during reading Chinese sentences: Evidence from eye movements

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY
卷 14, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1148815

关键词

orthography; phonology; misspelled characters; eye movements; Chinese reading

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the role of phonological and orthographic processing in Chinese reading. The results showed that phonological errors caused more disruptions in the early and later stages of word recognition. Orthographic errors caused equal disruptions in the early stage but more disruptions later on. This suggests that orthography plays a dominant role in Chinese word recognition, while phonology has a weaker and more limited role.
The role of phonological and orthographic processing and their time course during lexical processing and sentence reading remain controversial. By adopting a misspelled-characters disruption paradigm and eye-tracking technique, we manipulated the writing for the first characters of two-character target words to investigate the relative role of orthographic and phonological processing on word recognition in Chinese reading. There are four conditions: (a) correct character, (b) misspelled character with a stroke missing, (c) misspelled homographic character, and (d) misspelled homophonic character. The results showed that homophonic errors caused more disruptions than other conditions in the early (first-pass reading times) and later (total reading time) stages of lexical processing during Chinese reading. Homographic errors and omitted stroke errors lead to equal disruptions at the early stage of word recognition, but homographic errors cause more disruptions at the later stage. These results suggest that orthography plays a dominant role in word recognition during Chinese reading, whereas phonology plays a weaker and more limited role. The direct access and dual-rote hypothesis may well explain the mechanism of lexical processing in Chinese reading.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据