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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Psychological review 2001-07, Vol.108 (3), p.674-681 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
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 & 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.</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 & 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&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 & 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.</description><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Cognition & 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 & 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 & 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.</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 |