{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02633559066967645, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0015048908954100827, 'mean_word_length': 5.303317535545023, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Reading aloud: spelling-sound translation uses central attention.

Contrary to the received view that reading aloud reflects processes that are "automatic," recent evidence suggests that some of these processes require a form of attention. This issue was investigated further by examining the effect of a prior presentation of exception words (words whose spelling-sound translation are atypical, such as pint as compared with mint, hint, or lint) and pseudohomophones (nonwords that sound identical to words, such as brane from brain) on reading aloud in the context of the psychological refractory period paradigm. For exception words, the joint effects of repetition and stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) yielded an underadditive interaction on the time to read aloud, replicating previous work -- a short SOA between Task 1 and Task 2 increased reaction time (RT) and reduced the magnitude of the repetition effect relative to the long SOA. For pseudohomophones, in contrast, the joint effects of repetition and SOA were additive on RT. These results provide converging evidence for the conclusion that (a) processing up to and including the orthographic input lexicon does not require central attention when reading aloud, whereas (b) translating lexical and sublexical spelling to sound requires the use of central attention.