<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Stem and fragment priming on verbal forms of Italian</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Alessandro Laudanna</string-name>
          <email>alaudanna@unisa.it</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Giulia Bracco</string-name>
          <email>gcbracco@unisa.it</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>University of Salerno</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Via Giovanni Paolo II, 132 84084 - Fisciano, SA</addr-line>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>University of Salerno</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Via Giovanni Paolo II, 132 84084 - Fisciano, SA</addr-line>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>English. In this paper we investigate the respective roles of orthographic and morphological structure in the processing of Italian verbal forms by using the masked priming paradigm. According to the morphology-based view, in a priming condition the recognition of an inflected word should be facilitated by the presentation of the stem. The cohort model, instead, postulates that the orthographic material from the word's onset to the uniqueness point should be sufficient for the activation of the morphological family.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>Italiano. In questo lavoro indaghiamo il ruolo della
struttura ortografica e della struttura morfologica
nella elaborazione delle forme verbali dell’italiano,
usando il paradigma del priming mascherato. Secondo
i modelli basati sulla morfologia, in una condizione di
priming il riconoscimento di una forma flessa
dovrebbe essere facilitato dalla preventiva presentazione
della radice. I modelli coorte, invece, propongono che
il materiale ortografico dall’inizio della parola fino al
punto di unicità sia sufficiente per attivare la famiglia
morfologica.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>1 Introduction</title>
      <p>
        According to the cohort models of visual word
recognition
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">(Johnson and Pugh, 1994)</xref>
        , all the
sources of information that contribute to the
identification of a target word proceed from left to
right: a single word of the cohort becomes unique
at the uniqueness point, when it remains the only
candidate corresponding to the orthographic
configuration of the stimulus. At that point the
recognition takes place. Cohort models use the
neighborhood size and the frequency distribution of
neighbors as predictors of the competition
between candidates and of the consequent
recognition latencies. The same models not always deal
with the internal morphological structure of the
word (but see Marslen-Wilson, 1987). In Italian,
verbal families have orthographically similar
members, but these words often become ‘unique’
only at the end, since information about mood,
tense and number is carried by affixes in the final
part of the word. The N-count is not the best
measure to describe their relatedness. On the other
hand, morphological parsing accounts
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10 ref25 ref3 ref7">(e.g.,
Baayen, Dijkstra, and Schreuder, 1997; Burani
and Caramazza, 1987; Colé, Beauvillain, and
Segui, 1989; Taft, 1979)</xref>
        support the argument that
the stem is the key of access to the lexicon.
Morphological priming shows that, even though
morphologically related pairs share some
orthographic material (verbs sharing the stem also
share letters in initial position, unless they are
prefixed), the role played by the morphological
structure is different from the one played by the
orthographic structure
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11 ref24">(Pastizzo and Feldman, 2002)</xref>
        .
In the following experiments, we used the priming
paradigm to preactivate both the morphological
and the orthographic keys of access. Many studies
employing the priming paradigm used an
orthographically similar baseline, while others
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1 ref12 ref19 ref21 ref23">(e.g.,
Feldman and Soltano, 1999; Marslen-Wilson,
Tyler, Waksler, and Older, 1994)</xref>
        employed
orthographically and morphologically dissimilar
baselines, and others, finally,
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16 ref17">(Giraudo and Grainger,
2000; Grainger, Colé, and Segui, 1991)</xref>
        estimated
morphological facilitation in comparison with
both types of baselines. To our knowledge, no
study employed the stem priming in Italian, by
using both an orthographic and a morphological
baseline. We use the term ‘stem’ to denote the
residual part of the word when all inflectional
affixes are removed and that can, or cannot be,
complex. In contrast, the root is not analysable
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">(Bauer,
1988)</xref>
        . The stem does not end in a vowel, and if
presented in isolation, it appears as an incomplete
word, an orthographic fragment, even if it carries
lexical information. By this token, this feature
could also turn out to be a benefit: studies
employing the priming paradigm usually have to deal
with the objection that the base form is a word.
The stem primes provide an abstract lexical
information in a non-lexicalized form. In order to
ascertain if the initial string of letters up to the
uniqueness point is the orthographic access code,
in Experiment 1 we used Italian verbs with the
uniqueness point occurring before the stem (e.g.,
‘ABBAN’ is a fragment present only in the
morphological family of ‘abbandonare’, to abandon.
All the words starting with the fragment
‘ABBAN’ (e.g. ‘abbandonai’, I abandoned,
‘abbandonato’, abandoned) belong to the same
morphological family). Then, in Experiment 2, we started
from the consideration that, when the initial
fragment before the stem is shared by more than one
family, only a non homographic stem is the true
‘uniqueness point’: we used verbal forms with the
uniqueness point only at the stem boundary (e.g.,
the fragment ‘DISTRI’ is shared by two
morphological families: ‘distribuire’, to distribute, and
‘districare’, to unravel, whose stems, ‘DISTRIB’
and ‘DISTRIC’, respectively, have no
homograph). The masked priming paradigm was used
in order to avoid intuitions or response strategies
in participants
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13 ref14 ref7">(Forster and Davis, 1984; Forster,
Davis, Schoknecht and Carter, 1987)</xref>
        : this
technique avoids the overt detection of any relation
between prime and target. Moreover, it has been
argued that lexical decision latencies associated
with masked priming also reflect the organization
of the lexicon in the mind, rather than representing
the mechanisms directly involved during single
words access
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">(Baayen, 2014)</xref>
        . In Experiment 2
cohorts defined by the fragment and by the stem had
different frequency distribution, with fragments
matching the initial part of lower or higher
frequency morphological families. By this token, on
the one hand we expected to detect the
morphological vs. orthographic nature of the key(s) of
access to the lexicon; on the other hand, we
indirectly tested the stem frequency effect.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>2 Experiment 1</title>
      <p>Italian verbs such as ‘abbandonare’ (to abandon)
or ‘scivolare’ (to slip) contain fragments
(‘ABBAN’ and ‘SCIVO’), that, although shorter than
the respective stems ‘abbandon’ and ‘scivol’ , can
be considered ‘morphological uniqueness points’,
because they belong to just one morphological
family. Those stimuli are relevant to decide
whether the stem is the necessary key of access to
lexical information, or the fragment is sufficient
to contact the lexicon. According to the
morphology-based view, in a priming condition the
recognition of an inflected word should be strongly
facilitated by the presentation of the stem.
According to the cohort model, instead, the orthographic
material from the word’s onset to the uniqueness
point should be sufficient for the activation of the
morphological family.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>2.1 Method</title>
      <p>
        Stimuli We selected 16 inflected forms of verbs
with a ‘unique’ initial fragment (e.g.,
‘abbandonare’, to abandon), which served as targets in
three different experimental conditions: A)
primed by the stem, (e.g., ‘ABBANDON’); B)
primed by the initial fragment up to the
uniqueness point (e.g., ‘ABBAN’); C) preceded by an
orthographically unrelated fragment which shared
no letter with the prime (e.g., ‘COTRU’). Mean
values for length were 6.9 letters for Stems and
5.3 for Unrelated Prime and Fragments;
primetarget orthographic overlap was 67% in Stem
Condition and 55% in Fragment Condition.
Target mean frequency was 13; root frequency was
462 and initial stem cohort frequency was 245.
Three hundred eighty-four items were included in
the list as fillers. One hundred eighty-four were
words, (40 adjectives, 106 nouns, 38 inflected
verbal forms). Those words, together with those in
the experimental list, displayed a distribution
similar to the one of written Italian
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">(see CoLFIS,
Bertinetto et al., 2005)</xref>
        . The filler words were
matched with experimental targets for their mean
length in letters and for their surface frequency.
The list included two-hundred items as
pseudoword targets. The whole list was composed
of 200 words and 200 pseudoword targets
preceded in turn by 100 existing primes and 100 non
existing primes.
      </p>
      <p>Participants Fifty-four participants, all
students of the University of Salerno, and native
speakers of Italian, took part into the experiment.
They served for a session lasting about 40
minutes. The whole experiment was arranged in
three different sessions and each session
contained all the targets in one of the three
experimental condition (either preceded by the
fragment, or preceded by the stem, or preceded by the
unrelated fragment). Each participant was
submitted to a single experimental session, for a total of
18 ‘superparticipants’. Each superparticipant was
composed of 3 participants, and constituted one
data point in the statistical analyses.</p>
      <sec id="sec-4-1">
        <title>Equipment Response box, connected to</title>
        <p>an IBM PC running the E-Prime 1.1 software
(Version 1.1).</p>
        <p>Procedure Participants had to press the
button corresponding to their dominant hand for
the decision ‘word’, and another one for the
decision ‘non word’. When the participants reached
the 70 % of correct responses in a practice session,
the experiment started. All the stimuli appeared in
Courier New font, 18 point size in the centre of
the computer screen. The fixation was 51 ms,
followed by a 51 ms pause. Primes appeared for 51
ms, followed by a 12 characters backward mask
############ (150 ms). The targets remained on
the computer screen for a maximum of 1 second.
If the participants did not produce any answer
within 1 second, the feedback ‘Fuori tempo’ (Out
of time) appeared on the screen. The reaction
times (RT) were measured from target’s onset to
subject’s response, and the lack of a response was
scored as an error.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>2.2 Results and Discussion</title>
      <p>In Table 1 the mean reaction times and percentage
of errors are shown. Table 2 shows the size of
Stem and Fragment Priming effects in response
latencies and percentage of errors. For ‘size of
priming effect’ we mean the difference between
mean Reaction Times (or number of errors) in
Stem Condition (or in Fragment Condition) and
mean Reaction Times (or number of errors) in
Control Condition (Unrelated Fragment
Condition).</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>Condition</title>
      <sec id="sec-6-1">
        <title>Reaction Times Errors</title>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>Stem</title>
      <p>626 ms
12%</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-8">
      <title>Unrelated</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-9">
      <title>Fragment</title>
      <p>650 ms
15%</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-10">
      <title>Fragment</title>
      <p>626 ms
13%</p>
      <sec id="sec-10-1">
        <title>Stem Priming Efffect Fragment Priming Effect - 24 ms (-3%) - 24 ms (-2%)</title>
        <p>As shown in Table 1, the conditions
‘Fragment’ and ‘Stem’ were faster than
‘Unrelated Fragment’ (Control) condition and they did
not differ from each other despite stems were on
average longer and with more letters in common
with the target word than fragments. The ANOVA
on error data did not reveal any significant result
(ANOVA by participants F(2,34)=.50; p&gt;.6;
ANOVA by item F(2,30)=.66; p&gt;.5).</p>
        <p>The ANOVA on response latencies
showed a main effect of prime type only in the
analysis by participants (F(2,34)= 7.01; p&lt;.002;
ANOVA by item F(2,30)=1.80; p&gt;.2). Post-hoc
analyses based on the ANOVA by participants
showed a significant difference between the
conditions ‘Fragment’ vs. ‘Unrelated Fragment’
(p&lt;.002) and between the conditions ‘Stem’ vs.
‘Unrelated Fragment’ (p&lt;.002), but not between
‘Fragment’ vs. ‘Stem’ (p &gt;.9). The results are
inconsistent with predictions of
morphologicallybased view: the orthographic uniqueness point is
sufficient to contact lexical information.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-11">
      <title>3 Experiment 2</title>
      <p>In Experiment 2 we selected fragments (e.g.,
DISTRI) shared by verbal families with different
frequencies (e.g. ‘districare’, to unravel, lower
frequency, LF, and ‘distribuire’, to distribute, higher
frequency, HF). Both the accounts (orthographic
and morphological) suggest that the fragment is
not sufficient for the activation of the
morphological family, while the stem, which is also the
uniqueness point, should determine a stronger
facilitation. The aim of the Experiment 2 was also
to address the stem frequency effect.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-12">
      <title>3.1 Method</title>
      <p>Stimuli We selected 32 inflected forms of verbs in
16 pairs with the same initial fragment (e.g.,
‘distribuito’, and ‘districato’). One half of the list was
composed of 16 targets belonging to higher
frequency morphological families (HF, e.g.
distribuire, distributed); the other half was composed
of 16 targets belonging to lower frequency
morphological families (LF, e.g., districato,
unraveled). Target frequency was 2 for LF words, 15
for HF words, 50 for LF Stems and 216 for HF
Stems; initial stem cohort frequency was 216 for
HF words and 50 for LF words, root frequency
was 676 for HF words and 60 for LF words;
prime- target orthographic overlap was 72% in
Stem condition and 53% in Fragment condition.
The same three different experimental conditions
of Experiment 2 were arranged. Three hundred
sixty-eight items were included in the list as
fillers. One-hundred sixty-eight were words,
twohundred items as pseudoword targets. The whole
list was composed of 200 words and 200
pseudowords targets preceded in turn by 100
existing primes and 100 non existing primes.</p>
      <sec id="sec-12-1">
        <title>Participants Fifty-four participants, all</title>
        <p>students of the University of Salerno, and native
speakers of Italian, took part into the Experiment.
Each participant was submitted to a single session
(like in Experiment 1), for a total of 18
superparticipants. Each superparticipant was composed of
3 participants.</p>
        <p>Equipment and procedure They were the
same as in Experiment 1.
3.2</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-13">
      <title>Results and Discussion</title>
      <p>In Tables 3 and 4 the mean reaction times and
percentage of errors are shown. Table 5 shows the
size of Stem and Fragment Priming effects in
response latencies and percentage of errors.</p>
      <p>LF</p>
      <sec id="sec-13-1">
        <title>Stem Condition Reaction Times 652 ms Errors 22%</title>
        <p>The ANOVA on error data showed an
effect of frequency in analyses on both participants
(F(1,16)=22.33; p&lt;.0005) and items (F(1,30)=3,91;
p&lt;.05): LF frequency words elicited higher error
rates; we also found an effect of prime type in
analyses on both participants (F(2,32)=5.00; p&lt;.01)
and items (F(2,60)=4.42; p&lt;.01), but no interaction
(ANOVA by participants F(2,32)=1.23; p&gt;.3;
ANOVA by item F(2,60)=1.29; p&gt;.2). The ANOVA
on RT showed a main effect of frequency in
analyses on both participants (F(1,17)=25.80; p&lt;.0001)
and items (F(1,30)=4.41; p&lt;.04), no effect of prime
type (ANOVA by participants: F(2,34)=.07; p&gt;.9,
ANOVA by item: F(2,60)=.18; p&gt;.8), and no
interaction (ANOVA by participants F(2,34)=1.07; p&gt;.3;
ANOVA by item F(2,60)=.15; p&gt;.8). On average,
HF targets were recognized better than LF targets
(621 ms Vs. 647 ms), with faster latencies and a
lower percentage of errors (13% Vs. 24%). The
lack of priming effect for the Stem condition as
compared with the Unrelated Fragment condition
is the most surprising result. Post-hoc correlations
were performed using main lexical and
orthographic variables as predictors, and size of stem
and fragment priming effects for RT and errors as
criteria. The correlations on results in Fragment
condition showed a significant length effect for
the fragment prime on HF words (r=-58, p&lt;.02).
More interestingly, correlations in Stem
conditions showed that the ratio between the surface
frequency and the frequency of the stem in initial
position is inversely correlated with the size of
stem priming (r= -.36, p&lt;.04). The higher the
ratio, the faster the latencies: the “relative
frequency” of the form in its cohort determines the
direction of the effect.The correlation was reliable
on LF words (r=-.60, p&lt;.01), while it was not
significant on HF words (r=.31 p&gt;.2). The effect did
not occur in the Fragment condition, and this
might suggest that the effect occurs at the point
where the morphological family is selected: the
more frequent the cohort, the stronger the
inhibition for a verbal form that has a low surface
frequency. No effect of cumulative root frequency
occurred when the frequency count was obtained
by including words embedding the stem in any
position (for instance prefixed words), and this
allows us to assume that the effect is orthographic
in nature. We conclude that not only the word
surface frequency, but also the “relative frequency”
of the word with respect to its cohort is
responsible for recognition.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-14">
      <title>4 General Discussion</title>
      <p>
        Results of Experiment 1 show that when
orthographic information about initial part of the word
is exhaustive, it is as reliable as stem priming, and
these results are difficult to reconcile with the
morphologically- based view which postulates
that the stem is critical for lexical access. In
addition, the ‘relative frequency’ effect (Experiment
2), which arises in Stem Condition, suggests that,
during recognition, when a low frequency word
shares the stem with higher frequency members,
it is disadvantaged. In order to gain lexical access,
the word has to sustain a harder competition with
other members according to their frequency
distribution in the morphological family. This effect
has been largely described for orthographic
neighborhood
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10 ref18">(Grainger, O'Regan, Jacobs, and Segui,
1989)</xref>
        , but, again, it is difficult to reconcile with
the stem frequency effect
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13 ref8">(Burani, Salmaso, and
Caramazza, 1984)</xref>
        which states the opposite, with
cumulative frequency of morphologically related
words facilitating the recognition of a low
frequency word. These results are in line with
previous data on Italian, which failed in replicating root
frequency effects
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">(Laudanna and Bracco, 2009)</xref>
        .
Root morpheme frequency effects are crucial in
the general issue of whether words are accessed
through decomposition rather than as full forms,
since it has been widely used as the strongest
evidence in favor of the hypothesis of the root
morpheme representation.
      </p>
      <p>
        Nevertheless, the morphological parsing
account is not the unique explanation for root
frequency effects: also full listing models
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">(see
Giraudo and Grainger, 2001)</xref>
        can provide a general
outline in which this effect is explained, for
instance, in terms of lexical connections. This view
has been inspected also in linguistics:
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">Bybee
(1995)</xref>
        proposed that the activation level of a word
is the result of lexical connections and lexical
strength, with the first one determined by the
frequency of the lexical item, and lexical connections
corresponding to the pattern of weight
connections associated with the links between related
items. For high frequency words the individual
lexical strength is elevated; low frequency words
have a weak lexical activation and need the
support of the activation of lexical connections. This
theory is consistent with the claim that whole
word frequency effects arise over a precise
threshold
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1 ref12 ref23">(Alegre and Gordon, 1999)</xref>
        . If the measure for
these connections is the stem frequency, the more
frequent the stem, the faster the recognition
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11 ref13 ref24 ref26 ref8">(Burani et al., 1984, Traficante and Burani, 2003,
Colombo and Burani, 2002)</xref>
        .
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">Meunier and Segui
(1999)</xref>
        found that the relative frequency of family
members affects the recognition of auditory
stimuli: words with high-frequency suffixed
candidates derived from the same stem were recognized
more slowly than words with morphological
family members of a lower frequency. The effects
discussed in this paper are also consistent with
previous data on stem priming and the “relative
frequency” effect in Italian
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">(Bracco and Laudanna,
2012)</xref>
        , suggesting that the relations between
words in the paradigm need to be taken into
account, even if we maintain that whole word
representations are the keys for lexical access.
      </p>
      <p>In summary, the results presented in this
paper about the processing of Italian verbal forms
suggest that it is performed sequentially and it
proceeds from left-to-right. Morphological
structure does not play a deterministic role, and
recognition is guided by the information carried by the
initial part of the word, whether it matches a
morpheme or not.</p>
      <p>Priming induced by ‘unique’ fragments is
as reliable as stem priming. In addition, stem
priming is not explainable in terms of a stem
frequency effect.</p>
      <p>Furthermore, the observation of a
‘relative frequency’ rather than a ‘stem frequency’
effect, suggests that we are tapping into a
phenomenon concerning connections among whole
words.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Alegre</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gordon</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1999</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Frequency effects and the representational status of regular inflections</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Memory &amp; Language</source>
          ,
          <volume>40</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>41</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>61</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Baayen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2014</year>
          )
          <article-title>Experimental and psycholinguistic approaches to studying derivation</article-title>
          . In: R. Lieber and P. Stekauer (Eds),
          <source>Handbook of derivational morphology</source>
          . Oxford: Oxford University Press,
          <fpage>95</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>117</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Baayen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dijkstra</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Schreuder</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1997</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Singulars and plurals in Dutch: Evidence for a parallel dual-route model</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Memory and Language</source>
          ,
          <volume>37</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>94</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>117</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bauer</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1988</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Introducing Linguistic Morphology</article-title>
          . Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bertinetto</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Burani</surname>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Laudanna</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Marconi</surname>
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ratti n</surname>
          </string-name>
          , D.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rolando</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Thornton</surname>
            <given-names>A.M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2005</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Corpus e Lessico di frequenza dell'Italiano Scritto (CoLFIS</article-title>
          ) http://alphalinguistica.sns.it/CoLFIS/CoLFIS_Presentazione.htm
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Bracco G.</given-names>
            , and
            <surname>Laudanna</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>A.</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2012</year>
          ).
          <article-title>“Meccanismi di competizione tra forme verbali nell'accesso al lessico mentale”</article-title>
          . In:
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pier Marco</surname>
            <given-names>BERTINETTO</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Valentina</surname>
            <given-names>BAMBINI</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Irene</surname>
            <given-names>RICCI</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>e Collaboratori (a cura di). Linguaggio e cervello / Semantica, Atti del XLII Convegno della Società di Linguistica Italiana (Pisa</article-title>
          , Scuola Normale Superiore,
          <fpage>25</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>27</lpage>
          settembre
          <year>2008</year>
          ). Roma: Bulzoni. Volume
          <volume>2</volume>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Burani</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Caramazza</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1987</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Representation and processing of derived words</article-title>
          .
          <source>Language and Cognitive Processes</source>
          ,
          <volume>3</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>217</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>227</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Burani</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Salmaso</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Caramazza</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1984</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Morphological structure and lexical access</article-title>
          .
          <source>Visible Language</source>
          ,
          <volume>18</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>348</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>358</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bybee</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J. L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1995</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Regular morphology and the lexicon</article-title>
          .
          <source>Language and Cognitive Processes</source>
          ,
          <volume>10</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>425</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>455</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Colé</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Beauvillain</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Segui</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1989</year>
          ).
          <article-title>On the representation and processing of prefixed and suffixed derived words: A differential frequency effect</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Memory and Language</source>
          ,
          <volume>28</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>13</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Colombo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Burani</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2002</year>
          ).
          <article-title>The influence of age of acquisition, root frequency and context availability in processing nouns and verbs</article-title>
          .
          <source>Brain and Language</source>
          ,
          <volume>81</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>398</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>411</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Feldman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Soltano</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1999</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Morphological priming: The role of prime duration, semantic transparency and affix position</article-title>
          .
          <source>Brain and Language</source>
          ,
          <volume>60</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>33</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>39</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Forster</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K. I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Davis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1984</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition</source>
          ,
          <volume>10</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>680</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>698</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Forster</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K. I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Davis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Schoknecht</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Carter</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1987</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Masked priming with graphemically related forms: Repetition or partial activation?</article-title>
          <source>Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology</source>
          ,
          <volume>39</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>211</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>251</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Giraudo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>and</article-title>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Grainger</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2001</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Priming complex words: Evidence for supralexical representation of morphology</article-title>
          .
          <source>Psychonomic Bulletin &amp; Review</source>
          ,
          <volume>8</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>127</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>131</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Giraudo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Grainger</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2000</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Effects of prime word frequency and cumulative root frequency in masked morphological priming</article-title>
          .
          <source>Language and Cognitive Processes</source>
          <volume>15</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>421</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>444</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Grainger</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Colé</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Segui</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1991</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Masked morphological priming in visual word recognition</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Memory and Language</source>
          ,
          <volume>30</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>370</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>384</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Grainger</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>O</given-names>
            <surname>'Regan</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Jacobs</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            , and
            <surname>Segui</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>J.</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1989</year>
          ).
          <article-title>On the role of competing word units in visual word recognition: The neighborhood frequency effect</article-title>
          .
          <source>Perception and Psychophysics</source>
          ,
          <volume>45</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>189</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>195</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Johnson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N. F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pugh</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K. R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1994</year>
          ).
          <article-title>A cohort model of visual word recognition</article-title>
          .
          <source>Cognitive Psychology</source>
          ,
          <volume>26</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>240</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>346</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Laudanna A.</given-names>
            , and
            <surname>Bracco</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>G.</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2009</year>
          ).
          <article-title>“Family Frequency, Stem Frequency and Family Size in Visual Word Recognition of Italian Verbal Forms”</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of the 6th International Morphological Processing Conference. Turku, June</source>
          <volume>14</volume>
          -17,
          <year>2009</year>
          , Turku: Morproc, p.
          <fpage>63</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>64</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Marlsen-Wilson</surname>
          </string-name>
          , W.D.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tyler</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Waksler</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Older</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1994</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon</article-title>
          .
          <source>Psychological Review</source>
          ,
          <volume>101</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>3</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>33</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Marslen-Wilson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>W.D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>l987</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition</article-title>
          . In U. Frauenfelder and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>L.K.</given-names>
            <surname>Tyler</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Spoken word recognition</article-title>
          . Cambridge. MA, MIT Press,
          <fpage>71</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>102</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref23">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Meunier</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Segui</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1999</year>
          )
          <article-title>Morphological priming effect: the role of surface frequency</article-title>
          .
          <source>Brain and language</source>
          ,
          <volume>68</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>54</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>60</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref24">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pastizzo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M. J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Feldman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L. B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2002</year>
          )
          <article-title>Discrepancies between orthographic and unrelated baselines in masked priming undermine a decompositional account of morphological facilitation</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition</source>
          <volume>28</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>244</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>249</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref25">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Taft</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1979</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Recognition of affixed words and the word frequency effect</article-title>
          .
          <source>Memory and Cognition</source>
          ,
          <volume>7</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>263</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>272</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref26">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Traficante</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Burani</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2003</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Visual processing of Italian verbs and adjectives: The role of the inflectional family size</article-title>
          . In R. H.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Baayen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Schreuder</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <source>Morphological Structure in Language Processing</source>
          , Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter,
          <volume>45</volume>
          -
          <fpage>64</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>