Features versus redundancy: comments on Massaro, Venezky, and Taylor's "Orthographic regularity, positional frequency, and visual processing of letter strings".
Massaro, Venezky, and Taylor (1979) found only a modest effect of familiarity on letter search, apparently because they pitted pseudowords (rather than real words) against nonwords and used lowercase rather than uppercase letters. Precuing the target letter seemed to reduce the familiarity effect they found yet further, but this conclusion is clouded by the fact that reaction time data were compared with accuracy data. Because similarity between target and nontarget letters tended to have more of an effect when familiarity had less of an effect. Massaro et al. proposed a successive model, with features being detected in the first stage and orthographic structure being used in a second stage. However, a concurrent model, with a self-terminating race between lower and higher level processes, can account for the data just as well. Data from Massaro et al. and from Krueger decisively demonstrate that there is a familiarity effect based on sequential redundancy over and above any effect based on spatial redundancy (Mason 1975). The Massaro et al. data also indicate that the relative familiarity effect is constant across various age groups (Krueger, Keen & Rublevich, 1974).
D003463:Cues; D004193:Discrimination Learning; D005556:Form Perception; D006801:Humans; D011939:Mental Recall; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D011932:Reading