Counter Model for Word Identification: Reply to Bowers (1999)

The counter model ( R. Ratcliff & G. McKoon, 1997 ) was designed to explain the normal processes of word identification and how they are influenced by a prior encounter with a word. The model accounts for the findings of word identification experiments in which words are flashed briefly. A cruci...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Psychological review 2001-07, Vol.108 (3), p.674-681
Hauptverfasser: McKoon, Gail, Ratcliff, Roger
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 681
container_issue 3
container_start_page 674
container_title Psychological review
container_volume 108
creator McKoon, Gail
Ratcliff, Roger
description The counter model ( R. Ratcliff & G. McKoon, 1997 ) was designed to explain the normal processes of word identification and how they are influenced by a prior encounter with a word. The model accounts for the findings of word identification experiments in which words are flashed briefly. A crucial finding is that prior encounters with words typically lead to biases such that a previously encountered word is more likely to be given as a response. However, for low-frequency words, a prior encounter can improve overall performance ( J. S. Bowers, 1999 ; E. M. Wagenmakers, R. Zeelenberg, & J. G. W. Raaijmakers, 2000 ). The authors show how the model can explain this result. Also, J. S. Bowers (1999) has claimed that some earlier data concerning dissimilar alternatives in forced-choice experiments that support the counter model are spurious, but the authors show that his claims are incorrect. In sum, the authors argue for a theoretical approach that offers a detailed description of the cognitive processes of word identification and explains performance across tasks, measures, and independent variables.
doi_str_mv 10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.674
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85548923</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>38272877</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a391t-f834cc2a3b3bbd888c88167879188e2665365565370775acfd9cabd69d10f8573</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU2LFDEQhoMo7uzqLxBkENdbj6lUPipHGVxdWPGi6C2k02nopaczJt3C_nszzqCLBzeHCgVPvfXxMvYC-AY4mrecIzbCqu81pQ1utJGP2Aos2gakgcds9Yc4Y-el3PL6wNqn7AxAEiGJFbvcpmWaY15_Sl0c133K628pd-vrLk7z0A_Bz0OanrEnvR9LfH76L9jXq_dfth-bm88frrfvbhqPFuamJ5QhCI8ttm1HRIEItCFjgSgKrRVqpWo03BjlQ9_Z4NtO2w54T8rgBXtz1N3n9GOJZXa7oYQ4jn6KaSmOlJJkBT4IGuCKUMsHwXoEI8gcWr_6B7xNS57qtk6DlFzUwf8HCZACrEaoEB6hkFMpOfZun4edz3cOuDs45w6-uIMvNSWHrjpXq16epJd2F7u_NSerKvD6BPgS_NhnP4Wh3NNGjb_3uDxifu_dvtwFn-chjLG4HH_e6_cLxbyo2w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>614402556</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Counter Model for Word Identification: Reply to Bowers (1999)</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES</source><creator>McKoon, Gail ; Ratcliff, Roger</creator><creatorcontrib>McKoon, Gail ; Ratcliff, Roger</creatorcontrib><description>The counter model ( R. Ratcliff &amp; G. McKoon, 1997 ) was designed to explain the normal processes of word identification and how they are influenced by a prior encounter with a word. The model accounts for the findings of word identification experiments in which words are flashed briefly. A crucial finding is that prior encounters with words typically lead to biases such that a previously encountered word is more likely to be given as a response. However, for low-frequency words, a prior encounter can improve overall performance ( J. S. Bowers, 1999 ; E. M. Wagenmakers, R. Zeelenberg, &amp; J. G. W. Raaijmakers, 2000 ). The authors show how the model can explain this result. Also, J. S. Bowers (1999) has claimed that some earlier data concerning dissimilar alternatives in forced-choice experiments that support the counter model are spurious, but the authors show that his claims are incorrect. In sum, the authors argue for a theoretical approach that offers a detailed description of the cognitive processes of word identification and explains performance across tasks, measures, and independent variables.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0033-295X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-1471</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.674</identifier><identifier>PMID: 11488382</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PSRVAX</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington, DC: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Bias ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cognition ; Cognition &amp; reasoning ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Human ; Humans ; Identification ; Information processing ; J.S. Bowers ; Language ; Learning. Memory ; Memory ; Models, Psychological ; Perception ; Psychology ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Reading ; Recognition (Psychology) ; Research Design ; Word Recognition ; Words</subject><ispartof>Psychological review, 2001-07, Vol.108 (3), p.674-681</ispartof><rights>2001 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2001 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Jul 2001</rights><rights>2001, American Psychological Association</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a391t-f834cc2a3b3bbd888c88167879188e2665365565370775acfd9cabd69d10f8573</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a391t-f834cc2a3b3bbd888c88167879188e2665365565370775acfd9cabd69d10f8573</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=1036377$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11488382$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>McKoon, Gail</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ratcliff, Roger</creatorcontrib><title>Counter Model for Word Identification: Reply to Bowers (1999)</title><title>Psychological review</title><addtitle>Psychol Rev</addtitle><description>The counter model ( R. Ratcliff &amp; G. McKoon, 1997 ) was designed to explain the normal processes of word identification and how they are influenced by a prior encounter with a word. The model accounts for the findings of word identification experiments in which words are flashed briefly. A crucial finding is that prior encounters with words typically lead to biases such that a previously encountered word is more likely to be given as a response. However, for low-frequency words, a prior encounter can improve overall performance ( J. S. Bowers, 1999 ; E. M. Wagenmakers, R. Zeelenberg, &amp; J. G. W. Raaijmakers, 2000 ). The authors show how the model can explain this result. Also, J. S. Bowers (1999) has claimed that some earlier data concerning dissimilar alternatives in forced-choice experiments that support the counter model are spurious, but the authors show that his claims are incorrect. In sum, the authors argue for a theoretical approach that offers a detailed description of the cognitive processes of word identification and explains performance across tasks, measures, and independent variables.</description><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Cognition &amp; reasoning</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Identification</subject><subject>Information processing</subject><subject>J.S. Bowers</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Learning. Memory</subject><subject>Memory</subject><subject>Models, Psychological</subject><subject>Perception</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Reading</subject><subject>Recognition (Psychology)</subject><subject>Research Design</subject><subject>Word Recognition</subject><subject>Words</subject><issn>0033-295X</issn><issn>1939-1471</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU2LFDEQhoMo7uzqLxBkENdbj6lUPipHGVxdWPGi6C2k02nopaczJt3C_nszzqCLBzeHCgVPvfXxMvYC-AY4mrecIzbCqu81pQ1utJGP2Aos2gakgcds9Yc4Y-el3PL6wNqn7AxAEiGJFbvcpmWaY15_Sl0c133K628pd-vrLk7z0A_Bz0OanrEnvR9LfH76L9jXq_dfth-bm88frrfvbhqPFuamJ5QhCI8ttm1HRIEItCFjgSgKrRVqpWo03BjlQ9_Z4NtO2w54T8rgBXtz1N3n9GOJZXa7oYQ4jn6KaSmOlJJkBT4IGuCKUMsHwXoEI8gcWr_6B7xNS57qtk6DlFzUwf8HCZACrEaoEB6hkFMpOfZun4edz3cOuDs45w6-uIMvNSWHrjpXq16epJd2F7u_NSerKvD6BPgS_NhnP4Wh3NNGjb_3uDxifu_dvtwFn-chjLG4HH_e6_cLxbyo2w</recordid><startdate>200107</startdate><enddate>200107</enddate><creator>McKoon, Gail</creator><creator>Ratcliff, Roger</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7T9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200107</creationdate><title>Counter Model for Word Identification</title><author>McKoon, Gail ; Ratcliff, Roger</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a391t-f834cc2a3b3bbd888c88167879188e2665365565370775acfd9cabd69d10f8573</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cognition</topic><topic>Cognition &amp; reasoning</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Identification</topic><topic>Information processing</topic><topic>J.S. Bowers</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Learning. Memory</topic><topic>Memory</topic><topic>Models, Psychological</topic><topic>Perception</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Reading</topic><topic>Recognition (Psychology)</topic><topic>Research Design</topic><topic>Word Recognition</topic><topic>Words</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>McKoon, Gail</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ratcliff, Roger</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>APA PsycArticles®</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>Psychological review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>McKoon, Gail</au><au>Ratcliff, Roger</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Counter Model for Word Identification: Reply to Bowers (1999)</atitle><jtitle>Psychological review</jtitle><addtitle>Psychol Rev</addtitle><date>2001-07</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>108</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>674</spage><epage>681</epage><pages>674-681</pages><issn>0033-295X</issn><eissn>1939-1471</eissn><coden>PSRVAX</coden><abstract>The counter model ( R. Ratcliff &amp; G. McKoon, 1997 ) was designed to explain the normal processes of word identification and how they are influenced by a prior encounter with a word. The model accounts for the findings of word identification experiments in which words are flashed briefly. A crucial finding is that prior encounters with words typically lead to biases such that a previously encountered word is more likely to be given as a response. However, for low-frequency words, a prior encounter can improve overall performance ( J. S. Bowers, 1999 ; E. M. Wagenmakers, R. Zeelenberg, &amp; J. G. W. Raaijmakers, 2000 ). The authors show how the model can explain this result. Also, J. S. Bowers (1999) has claimed that some earlier data concerning dissimilar alternatives in forced-choice experiments that support the counter model are spurious, but the authors show that his claims are incorrect. In sum, the authors argue for a theoretical approach that offers a detailed description of the cognitive processes of word identification and explains performance across tasks, measures, and independent variables.</abstract><cop>Washington, DC</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><pmid>11488382</pmid><doi>10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.674</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0033-295X
ispartof Psychological review, 2001-07, Vol.108 (3), p.674-681
issn 0033-295X
1939-1471
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85548923
source MEDLINE; EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES
subjects Bias
Biological and medical sciences
Cognition
Cognition & reasoning
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Human
Humans
Identification
Information processing
J.S. Bowers
Language
Learning. Memory
Memory
Models, Psychological
Perception
Psychology
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychology. Psychophysiology
Reading
Recognition (Psychology)
Research Design
Word Recognition
Words
title Counter Model for Word Identification: Reply to Bowers (1999)
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T11%3A43%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Counter%20Model%20for%20Word%20Identification:%20Reply%20to%20Bowers%20(1999)&rft.jtitle=Psychological%20review&rft.au=McKoon,%20Gail&rft.date=2001-07&rft.volume=108&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=674&rft.epage=681&rft.pages=674-681&rft.issn=0033-295X&rft.eissn=1939-1471&rft.coden=PSRVAX&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.674&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E38272877%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=614402556&rft_id=info:pmid/11488382&rfr_iscdi=true