Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T18:54:16.675Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

It's good . . . but is it ART?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 October 2000

Paul A. Luce ,
Stephen D. Goldinger  and
Michael S. Vitevitch
Paul A. Luce
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology and Center for Cognitive Science, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260 paul@deuro.fss.buffalo.edu wings.buffalo.edu/~luce
Stephen D. Goldinger
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287 goldinger@asu.edu
Michael S. Vitevitch
Affiliation:
Speech Research Laboratory, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405 mvitevit@indiana.edu www.indiana.edu/~srlweb
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We applaud Norris et al.'s critical review of the literature on lexical effects in phoneme decision making, and we sympathize with their attempt to reconcile autonomous models of word recognition with current research. However, we suggest that adaptive resonance theory (ART) may provide a coherent account of the data while preserving limited inhibitory feedback among certain lexical and sublexical representations.

Type
Brief Report
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , June 2000 , pp. 336
Copyright
© 2000 Cambridge University Press