Jasmine Spencer, Hasibe Kahraman, Elisabeth Beyersmann
{"title":"The bestersell effect: Nuances in positional encoding of morphemes in visual word recognition.","authors":"Jasmine Spencer, Hasibe Kahraman, Elisabeth Beyersmann","doi":"10.3758/s13423-025-02693-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Previous studies have confirmed stem morphemes (e.g., book) are identified in any position (e.g., in both bookmark and textbook) but prefixes and suffixes (e.g., re- in replay and -er in player) cannot be recognized when moved from their typical word-initial or word-final locations. However, English words with multiple affixes (e.g., unresolved, mindfulness) suggest there must be further nuance to the positional constraints imposed on affixes in the reading system to facilitate cases where affixes occur in atypical locations but still convey meaning. We used two lexical decision experiments (N = 90 native English-speaking participants each) to investigate the positional encoding of mid-embedded suffixes. In Experiment 1, transposed tri-morphemic nonwords ending in a chain of two suffixes (e.g., spitenessful [derived from spitefulness]), and transposed nonwords with string-initial suffixes (e.g., fulyouthness [derived from youthfulness]) were compared against orthographic controls (e.g., spitementdom/domyouthment). In Experiment 2, transposed tri-morphemic nonwords ending in a stem (e.g., bestersell [derived from bestseller]) and transposed nonwords with string-initial suffixes (e.g., erwalksleep [derived from sleepwalker]) were compared against orthographic controls (e.g., bestalsell/enwalksleep). Across both experiments, the results revealed a significantly larger morpheme transposition effect relative to controls for the mid-embedded compared with the string-initial suffix conditions. Items like bestersell activated the corresponding lexical representation of \"bestseller\" and made it more difficult to reject the target nonword, revealing that suffixes are not as strictly positionally encoded as previously assumed. These findings challenge existing predictions of positional requirements for affixes and provide evidence calling for more nuanced theoretical models of morphological processing.</p>","PeriodicalId":20763,"journal":{"name":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-025-02693-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Previous studies have confirmed stem morphemes (e.g., book) are identified in any position (e.g., in both bookmark and textbook) but prefixes and suffixes (e.g., re- in replay and -er in player) cannot be recognized when moved from their typical word-initial or word-final locations. However, English words with multiple affixes (e.g., unresolved, mindfulness) suggest there must be further nuance to the positional constraints imposed on affixes in the reading system to facilitate cases where affixes occur in atypical locations but still convey meaning. We used two lexical decision experiments (N = 90 native English-speaking participants each) to investigate the positional encoding of mid-embedded suffixes. In Experiment 1, transposed tri-morphemic nonwords ending in a chain of two suffixes (e.g., spitenessful [derived from spitefulness]), and transposed nonwords with string-initial suffixes (e.g., fulyouthness [derived from youthfulness]) were compared against orthographic controls (e.g., spitementdom/domyouthment). In Experiment 2, transposed tri-morphemic nonwords ending in a stem (e.g., bestersell [derived from bestseller]) and transposed nonwords with string-initial suffixes (e.g., erwalksleep [derived from sleepwalker]) were compared against orthographic controls (e.g., bestalsell/enwalksleep). Across both experiments, the results revealed a significantly larger morpheme transposition effect relative to controls for the mid-embedded compared with the string-initial suffix conditions. Items like bestersell activated the corresponding lexical representation of "bestseller" and made it more difficult to reject the target nonword, revealing that suffixes are not as strictly positionally encoded as previously assumed. These findings challenge existing predictions of positional requirements for affixes and provide evidence calling for more nuanced theoretical models of morphological processing.
先前的研究已经证实,词干语素(例如,book)在任何位置(例如,书签和教科书)都可以识别,但前缀和后缀(例如,re- in replay和-er in player)从其典型的单词开头或单词结尾位置移动时无法识别。然而,具有多个词缀的英语单词(例如,unresolved, mindfulness)表明,在阅读系统中,词缀的位置限制必须有进一步的细微差别,以促进词缀出现在非典型位置但仍能传达意思的情况。我们使用两个词汇决策实验(N = 90)来研究中嵌入后缀的位置编码。在实验1中,将以两个后缀结尾的转置三语素非词(如spitenessful[源自spitefulness])和以字符串开头后缀的转置非词(如fulyouthness[源自youthfulness])与正法对照(如spitementdom/domyouthment)进行比较。在实验2中,将以词干结尾的转置三语素非词(例如,bestsell[源自bestseller])和以字符串开头后缀的转置非词(例如,erwalksleep[源自sleepwalker])与正字法对照(例如,bestalsell/enwalksleep)进行比较。在这两个实验中,结果显示,与字符串初始后缀条件相比,中嵌入条件下的语素置换效应明显大于对照。像bestsell这样的项激活了“bestseller”的相应词法表示,使得拒绝目标非单词变得更加困难,这表明后缀并不像之前假设的那样严格地进行位置编码。这些发现挑战了对词缀位置要求的现有预测,并为形态学处理提供了更细致的理论模型。
期刊介绍:
The journal provides coverage spanning a broad spectrum of topics in all areas of experimental psychology. The journal is primarily dedicated to the publication of theory and review articles and brief reports of outstanding experimental work. Areas of coverage include cognitive psychology broadly construed, including but not limited to action, perception, & attention, language, learning & memory, reasoning & decision making, and social cognition. We welcome submissions that approach these issues from a variety of perspectives such as behavioral measurements, comparative psychology, development, evolutionary psychology, genetics, neuroscience, and quantitative/computational modeling. We particularly encourage integrative research that crosses traditional content and methodological boundaries.