Individual differences in processing pseudo-inflected nonwords. Schwarz, J., Bozic, M., & Post, B. In Proceedings of 11th International Conference of Experimental Linguistics, 2020. ExLing Society. ![Individual differences in processing pseudo-inflected nonwords [pdf]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/pdf.svg "pdf")
Paper doi abstract bibtex While the role of word stems has received much attention in morphological processing, the effects of inflectional suffixes on lexical access remain unclear. We address this gap as well as the contribution of individual differences on morphological segmentation with a visual priming experiment. Inflected and uninflected nonwords were preceded by a non-linguistic baseline string or the target’s suffix/word-final letters (e.g. XXXXing SMOYING). The results indicate that the suffix length is crucial for morphological effects to surface in visual priming and that morphological processing may be modulated by the individual’s reading profile and vocabulary size. We interpret this as evidence for variable morphemic activation: morphological cues can facilitate visual access when rapid whole-word processing is unavailable. The theoretical implications are discussed.
@inproceedings{schwarz_individual_2020,
title = {Individual differences in processing pseudo-inflected nonwords},
isbn = {9786188458512},
url = {https://exlingsociety.com/wp-content/uploads/proceedings/exling-2020/11_0044_000459.pdf},
doi = {10.36505/ExLing-2020/11/0044/000459},
abstract = {While the role of word stems has received much attention in morphological processing, the effects of inflectional suffixes on lexical access remain unclear. We address this gap as well as the contribution of individual differences on morphological segmentation with a visual priming experiment. Inflected and uninflected nonwords were preceded by a non-linguistic baseline string or the target’s suffix/word-final letters (e.g. XXXXing SMOYING). The results indicate that the suffix length is crucial for morphological effects to surface in visual priming and that morphological processing may be modulated by the individual’s reading profile and vocabulary size. We interpret this as evidence for variable morphemic activation: morphological cues can facilitate visual access when rapid whole-word processing is unavailable. The theoretical implications are discussed.},
urldate = {2025-04-17},
booktitle = {Proceedings of 11th {International} {Conference} of {Experimental} {Linguistics}},
publisher = {ExLing Society},
author = {Schwarz, Julia and Bozic, Mirjana and Post, Brechtje},
year = {2020},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"jPLbZHkqN5beXSRYL","bibbaseid":"schwarz-bozic-post-individualdifferencesinprocessingpseudoinflectednonwords-2020","author_short":["Schwarz, J.","Bozic, M.","Post, B."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"inproceedings","type":"inproceedings","title":"Individual differences in processing pseudo-inflected nonwords","isbn":"9786188458512","url":"https://exlingsociety.com/wp-content/uploads/proceedings/exling-2020/11_0044_000459.pdf","doi":"10.36505/ExLing-2020/11/0044/000459","abstract":"While the role of word stems has received much attention in morphological processing, the effects of inflectional suffixes on lexical access remain unclear. We address this gap as well as the contribution of individual differences on morphological segmentation with a visual priming experiment. Inflected and uninflected nonwords were preceded by a non-linguistic baseline string or the target’s suffix/word-final letters (e.g. XXXXing SMOYING). The results indicate that the suffix length is crucial for morphological effects to surface in visual priming and that morphological processing may be modulated by the individual’s reading profile and vocabulary size. We interpret this as evidence for variable morphemic activation: morphological cues can facilitate visual access when rapid whole-word processing is unavailable. The theoretical implications are discussed.","urldate":"2025-04-17","booktitle":"Proceedings of 11th International Conference of Experimental Linguistics","publisher":"ExLing Society","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Schwarz"],"firstnames":["Julia"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Bozic"],"firstnames":["Mirjana"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Post"],"firstnames":["Brechtje"],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2020","bibtex":"@inproceedings{schwarz_individual_2020,\n\ttitle = {Individual differences in processing pseudo-inflected nonwords},\n\tisbn = {9786188458512},\n\turl = {https://exlingsociety.com/wp-content/uploads/proceedings/exling-2020/11_0044_000459.pdf},\n\tdoi = {10.36505/ExLing-2020/11/0044/000459},\n\tabstract = {While the role of word stems has received much attention in morphological processing, the effects of inflectional suffixes on lexical access remain unclear. We address this gap as well as the contribution of individual differences on morphological segmentation with a visual priming experiment. Inflected and uninflected nonwords were preceded by a non-linguistic baseline string or the target’s suffix/word-final letters (e.g. XXXXing SMOYING). The results indicate that the suffix length is crucial for morphological effects to surface in visual priming and that morphological processing may be modulated by the individual’s reading profile and vocabulary size. We interpret this as evidence for variable morphemic activation: morphological cues can facilitate visual access when rapid whole-word processing is unavailable. The theoretical implications are discussed.},\n\turldate = {2025-04-17},\n\tbooktitle = {Proceedings of 11th {International} {Conference} of {Experimental} {Linguistics}},\n\tpublisher = {ExLing Society},\n\tauthor = {Schwarz, Julia and Bozic, Mirjana and Post, Brechtje},\n\tyear = {2020},\n}\n\n\n\n","author_short":["Schwarz, J.","Bozic, M.","Post, B."],"key":"schwarz_individual_2020","id":"schwarz_individual_2020","bibbaseid":"schwarz-bozic-post-individualdifferencesinprocessingpseudoinflectednonwords-2020","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://exlingsociety.com/wp-content/uploads/proceedings/exling-2020/11_0044_000459.pdf"},"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"bibtype":"inproceedings","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero-group/Inter_Linguistic_Sociey/5953948","dataSources":["wqFBtZsLZwQqPkACg"],"keywords":[],"search_terms":["individual","differences","processing","pseudo","inflected","nonwords","schwarz","bozic","post"],"title":"Individual differences in processing pseudo-inflected nonwords","year":2020}