A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming.

By Mark S. Seidenberg, James L. McClelland. 1989

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

The stability-plasticity dilemma: investigating the continuum from catastrophic forgetting to age-limited learning effects (2013, background): “In these connectionist models, lexical frequency is encoded in the strength of the connections between the different types of representations which are involved in recognizing and producing words (Seidenberg and McClelland, 1989; Plaut et al., 1996).”
Rethinking eliminative connectionism. (1998, methodology): “For example, in the Seidenberg and McClelland (1989) model, words that contain untrained phoneme triples (i.e., untrained Wickelphones) would lie outside the training space.”
The time course of perceptual choice: the leaky, competing accumulator model. (2001, methodology): “…the development of models that can capture psychological data on a number of different aspects of cognitive and perceptual processing (Cohen, Dunbar & McClelland, 1990; Plaut, McClelland, Seidenberg & Patterson, 1996; Seidenberg & McClelland, 1989), there have been some drawbacks to this approach.”
Learning to spell in Hebrew: Phonological and morphological factors (2001, background): “Grammatical words are usually monomorphemic and morphologically simplex, so that learning which homophonous phoneme should be represented by which letter is a matter of rote learning or of associating spelling units with (full or partial) phonological strings ( Seidenberg & McClelland 1989 ).”
Ambiguity and relatedness effects in semantic tasks: Are they due to semantic coding? (2006, unknown): “…processing (PDP) models (e.g., Borowsky & Masson, 1996; Kawamoto, 1993; Kawamoto, Farrar, & Kello, 1994; Plaut, 1997; Plaut & McClelland, 1993; Plaut, McClelland, Seidenberg, & Patterson, 1996; Rodd, Gaskell, & Marslen-Wilson, 2004; Seidenberg & McClelland, 1989; Van Orden, Pennington, & Stone, ed.”
Morphological influences on the recognition of monosyllabic monomorphemic words (2006, background): “The greater sensitivity of visual lexical decision to semantic variables is well known (Katz & Feldman, 1983; Lupker, 1979; Seidenberg & McClelland, 1989).”
FREQUENCY EFFECTS IN LANGUAGE PROCESSING (2002, unknown): “…correspondence within language have been successfully simulated in connectionist (Harm & Seidenberg, 1999; Plaut, McClelland, Seidenberg, & Patterson, 1996; Seidenberg & McClelland, 1989; Zorzi, Houghton, & Butterworth, 1998) and exemplar-based (Ellis & Hicks, 2000) computational models.”
The Overlap Model: A Model of Letter Position Coding (2008, methodology): “Van Assche, E., & Grainger, J. (2006).”
An Approximation of the Error Backpropagation Algorithm in a Predictive Coding Network with Local Hebbian Synaptic Plasticity (2017, methodology): “Furthermore, models employing the backpropagation algorithm have been successfully used to describe learning in the real brain during various cognitive tasks (Seidenberg & McClelland, 1989; McClelland, McNaughton, & O’Reilly, 1995; Plaut, McClelland, Seidenberg, & Patterson, 1996).”
Consequences of the Now-or-Never bottleneck for signed versus spoken languages (2015, background): “This quasi-regular structure (Seidenberg & McClelland 1989) does indeed seem to be widespread throughout many aspects of language (e.g., Culicover 1999; Goldberg 2006; Pierrehumbert 2002).”
Language Phenotype for Reading and Writing Disability: A Family Approach (2001, background): “Finally, although computational connectionist models have simulated skilled reading in adults (e.g., Seidenberg & McClelland, 1989) and beginning reading in children (e.g., Harm & Seidenberg, 1999), they have not made cross-age comparisons of the children and adults as we do for the first time in…”