Conditional Root Uniqueness Points: Psychological Validity and Perceptual Consequences

@article{citeulike:251664, abstract = { Wurm (1997) introduced a construct called the Conditional Root Uniqueness Point (CRUP), which was defined as the uniqueness point of the free root of a prefixed word, given the prefix in question. Prefixed words with free roots can be divided into two mutually exclusive categories: those with the CRUP at the same phoneme as the full-form uniqueness point (UP), and those where the CRUP precedes the full-form UP by one or more phonemes. Results of two reaction-time experiments indicate a substantial processing advantage for the latter group of words. Regression analyses revealed effects of the number of auditory competitors a target word had, semantic transparency and prefix likelihood. Finally, semantic transparency, root frequency, and number of competitors had different effects, depending upon whether the CRUP of a word coincided with or preceded the full-form UP. Existing models of word recognition need to be modified to accommodate the current results. Copyright 2001 Academic Press.}, author = {Wurm, L. H. and Ross, S. E. }, citeulike-article-id = {251664}, journal = {Journal of Memory and Language}, keywords = {competition, frequency, semantics, wordlevel}, month = {July}, number = {1}, pages = {39--57}, posted-at = {2005-07-12 02:47:23}, priority = {2}, title = {Conditional Root Uniqueness Points: Psychological Validity and Perceptual Consequences}, url = {http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ap/ml/2001/00000045/00000001/art02758}, volume = {45}, year = {2001} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:251664 L3 - citeulike-article-id:251664 N2 - Wurm (1997) introduced a construct called the Conditional Root Uniqueness Point (CRUP), which was defined as the uniqueness point of the free root of a prefixed word, given the prefix in question. Prefixed words with free roots can be divided into two mutually exclusive categories: those with the CRUP at the same phoneme as the full-form uniqueness point (UP), and those where the CRUP precedes the full-form UP by one or more phonemes. Results of two reaction-time experiments indicate a substantial processing advantage for the latter group of words. Regression analyses revealed effects of the number of auditory competitors a target word had, semantic transparency and prefix likelihood. Finally, semantic transparency, root frequency, and number of competitors had different effects, depending upon whether the CRUP of a word coincided with or preceded the full-form UP. Existing models of word recognition need to be modified to accommodate the current results. Copyright 2001 Academic Press. IS - 1 JF - Journal of Memory and Language EP - 57 TI - Conditional Root Uniqueness Points: Psychological Validity and Perceptual Consequences VL - 45 SP - 39 KW - competition KW - frequency KW - semantics KW - wordlevel AU - Wurm, LH AU - Ross, SE PY - 2001/07// UR - http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ap/ml/2001/00000045/00000001/art02758 ER -