L. (2015). Connectionist perspectives on language learning, representation and processing. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 6(3), 235–247. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1340.41 Juliano, C., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1994). A constraint‐based lexicalist account of the subject/object attachment preference. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 23(6), 459–471. doi: 10.1007/BF02146685.
42 Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
43 Kessler, B., & Treiman, R. (2001). Relationships between sounds and letters in English monosyllables. Journal of Memory and Language, 44(4), 592–617. doi: 10.1006/jmla.2000.2745.
44 Kumaran, D., Hassabis, D., & McClelland, J. L. (2016). What learning systems do intelligent agents need? Complementary learning systems theory updated. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(7), 512–534. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2016.05.004.
45 Lambon Ralph, M. A., Jefferies, E., Patterson, K., & Rogers, T. T. (2017). The neural and computational bases of semantic cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 18(1), 42–55. doi: 10.1038/nrn.2016.150.
46 MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101(4), 676–703. doi: 10.1037/0033‐295x.101.4.676.
47 Marshall, J. C., & Newcombe, F. (1973). Patterns of paralexia: A psycholinguistic approach. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2(3), 175–199. doi: 10.1007/BF01067101.
48 Mason, M. (1978). The role of spatial redundancy in grapheme recognition: Perception or inference? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4(4), 662–673. doi: 10.1037/0096‐1523.4.4.662.
49 New, B., Ferrand, L., Pallier, C., & Brysbaert, M. (2006). Reexamining the word length effect in visual word recognition: new evidence from the English Lexicon Project. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13, 45–52. doi: 10.3758/bf03193811.
50 Paap, K. R., & Noel, R. W. (1991). Dual‐route models of print to sound: Still a good horse race. Psychological Research, 53(1), 13–24. doi: 10.1007/BF00867328.
51 Patterson, K., & Lambon Ralph, M. A. (1999). Selective disorders of reading? Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 9(2), 235–239. doi: 10.1016/s0959‐4388(99)80033‐6.
52 Pearlmutter, N. J., & MacDonald, M. C. (1995). Individual differences and probabilistic constraints in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 34(4), 521–542. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1995.1024.
53 Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2007). Nested incremental modeling in the development of computational theories: The CDP+ model of reading aloud. Psychological Review, 114(2), 273–315. doi: 10.1037/0033‐295X.114.2.273.
54 Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2010). Beyond single syllables: Large‐scale modeling of reading aloud with the Connectionist Dual Process (CDP++) model. Cognitive Psychology, 61(2), 106–151. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2010.04.001.
55 Perry, C., Zorzi, M., & Ziegler, J. C. (2019). Understanding dyslexia through personalized large‐scale computational models. Psychological Science, 30(3), 386–395. doi: 10.1177/0956797618823540.
56 Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct. William Morrow & Co.
57 Plaut, D. C., & Kello, C. T. (1999). The emergence of phonology from the interplay of speech comprehension and production: A distributed connectionist approach. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), The emergence of language (pp. 381–415). Erlbaum.
58 Plaut, D. C., McClelland, J. L., Seidenberg, M. S., & Patterson, K. (1996). Understanding normal and impaired word reading: Computational principles in quasi‐regular domains. Psychological Review, 103(1), 56–115. doi: 10.1037/0033‐295x.103.1.56.
59 Pritchard, S. C., Coltheart, M., Marinus, E., & Castles, A. (2018). A computational model of the self‐teaching hypothesis based on the dual‐route cascaded model of reading. Cognitive Science, 42(3), 722–770. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12571.
60 Pritchard, S. C., Coltheart, M., Palethorpe, S., & Castles, A. (2012). Nonword reading: Comparing dual‐route cascaded and connectionist dual‐process models with human data. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(5), 1268–1288. doi: 10.1037/a0026703.
61 Rastle, K. (2016). Visual word recognition. In G. Hickok & S. L. Small (Eds.), Neurobiology of language (pp. 255–264). Academic Press. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198568971.013.0005.
62 Rastle, K., & Coltheart, M. (1999). Serial and strategic effects in reading aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25. (2), 482–503. doi: 10.1037/0096‐1523.25.2.482.
63 Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1986). On learning the past tenses of English verbs. In J. L. McClelland, D. E. Rumelhart, & the PDP Research Group (Eds.), Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition. Volume 2 (pp. 216–271). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
64 Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J. L., & PDP Research Group (Eds.), (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Volume 1. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
65 Seidenberg, M. S. (1985). The time course of phonological code activation in two writing systems. Cognition, 19(1), 1–30. doi: 10.1016/0010‐0277(85)90029‐0.
66 Seidenberg, M. S. (1988). Cognitive neuropsychology and language: The state of the art. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 5(4), 403–426. doi: 10.1080/02643298808253267.
67 Seidenberg, M. S. (1992). Beyond orthographic depth: Equitable division of labor. In R. Frost and L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning (pp. 85–118). Elsevier.
68 Seidenberg, M. S. (2017). Language at the speed of sight: How we read, why so many cannot, and what can be done about it. New York: Basic Books.
69 Seidenberg, M. S., Cooper Borkenhagen, M., & Kearns, D. (2020). Lost in translation? Challenges in connecting reading science and educational practice. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S119–S130. doi: 10.1002/rrq.341.
70 Seidenberg, M. S., & Gonnerman, L. (2000). Explaining derivational morphology as the convergence of codes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 353–361. doi: org/10.1016/S1364‐6613(00)01515‐1.
71 Seidenberg, M. S., & MacDonald, M. C. (2018). The impact of language experience on language and reading: A statistical learning approach. Topics in Language Disorders, 38, 66–83. doi: 10.1097/TLD.0000000000000144.
72 Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96(4), 523–568. doi: 10.1037/0033‐295x.96.4.523.
73 Seidenberg, M. S., & Plaut, D. C. (2006). Progress in understanding word reading: Data fitting vs. theory building. In S. Andrews (Ed.), From ink marks to ideas: Current issues in lexical processing (pp. 25–49). Psychology Press.
74 Seidenberg, M. S., & Plaut, D. C. (2014). Quasiregularity and its discontents: The legacy of the past tense debate. Cognitive Science, 38, 1190–1228. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12147.
75 Seidenberg, M. S., Waters, G. S., Barnes, M. A., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1984). When does irregular spelling or pronunciation influence word recognition? Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23(3), 383–404. doi: 10.1016/S0022‐5371(84)90270‐6.
76 Share,
