Fast and Slow

June 11, 2018 | Author: Marian Waltami | Category: Documents


Comments



Description

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2018, Vol. 44, No. 8, 1066 –1071

© 2018 American Psychological Association 0096-1523/16/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000234

OBSERVATION

Fast and Slow Readers and the Effectiveness of Frequency Content: Evidence From Reading Times James Gordon Association or one of its allied publishers. use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Saudi University

America Psychological n

Text contains a range of different spatial frequencies but the effectiveness of spatial frequencies for normal variations in skilled adult reading ability is unknown. Accordingly, young skilled adult readers showing fast or slow reading ability read sentences displayed as normal or filtered to contain only very low, low, medium, high, or very high spatial frequencies. Reading times and eye movement measures of fixations and saccades assessed the effectiveness of these displays for reading. Reading times showed that, for each reading ability, medium, high, and very high spatial frequencies were all more effective than lower spatial frequencies. Indeed, for each reading ability, reading times for normal text were maintained when text contained only medium, high, or very high spatial frequencies. However, reading times for normal text and for each spatial frequency were all substantially shorter for fast readers than for slow readers, and this advantage for fast readers was similar for normal, medium, high, and very high spatial frequencies but much larger for low and very low spatial frequencies. In addition, fast readers made fewer and shorter fixations, fewer and shorter regressions, and longer forward saccades, than slow readers, and these differences were generally similar in size for normal, medium, high, and very high spatial frequencies, but larger when spatial frequencies were lower. These findings suggest that fast and slow adult readers can each use a range of different spatial frequencies for reading but fast readers make more effective use of these spatial frequencies and especially those that are lower.

This document is copyrighted by the

Thisarticleis intendedso lelyforthepersonal

Keywords: reading, eye movements

ual letters, but are less useful for seeing a word’s overall shape (e.g., Allen, Smith, Lien, Kaut, & Canfield, 2009; Jordan, 1990, 1995; Kwon & Legge, 2012; Legge, Pelli, Rubin, & Schleske, 1985; Patch-ing & Jordan, 2005a,2005b). Thus, although spatial frequencies are not apparent to the reader, reading relies fundamentally on these low-level visual properties of text.

Reading relies on making saccadic eye movements and ending each movement with a brief fixational pause during which time visual information is acquired from the text (see Rayner, 2009). However, the nature of the visual information acquired during each fixation, and its effectiveness for reading, are not fully known. Of particular relevance is that visual pathways exist that are selectively sensitive to spatial frequencies associated with different scales of information (e.g., Blakemore & Campbell, 1969; Lovegrove, Bowling, Badcock, & Blackwood, 1980; Robson, 1966). Accordingly, when reading, the visual system acquires a range of different spatial frequencies from text and these spatial frequencies then provide the bases for subsequent linguistic analyses that allow readers to make sense of what they are seeing. For example, lower spatial frequencies allow readers to see a word’s coarse overall shape but not its fine detail, whereas higher spatial frequencies allow readers to see a word’s fine detail, such as the precise form and location of individ-

However, the effectiveness of different spatial frequencies for reading and how this effectiveness differs for skilled adult readers of different reading abilities have yet to be established. Of particular importance is that while skilled adult reading generally is fast (up to 400 to 500 words per min), individual differences in reading speed are a normal component of the skilled adult reading population (e.g., Andrews, 2008, 2012; Ashby, Yang, Evans, & Rayner, 2012; Jackson & McClelland, 1979; Rayner, Slattery, & Bélanger, 2010). One possibility is that fast reading involves better use of predictive processes, such as parafoveal previews and sentence context (e.g., Hawelka, Schuster, Gagl, & Hutzler, 2015; Hersch & Andrews, 2012; Long, Oppy, & Seely, 1994; Murray & Burke, 2003). But many researchers have argued that fast reading is facilitated greatly by “bottom-up” processes that enable fast readers to gain visual access to the correct lexical representations more rapidly. For example, according to the lexical quality hypothesis of reading skill (e.g., Perfetti, 1992, 2007; see also Andrews, 2008, 2012; Veldre & Andrews, 2014), fast readers have high-quality lexical representations in which orthographic information defining a particular word is stored precisely and this ensures that a word can activate its correct lexical represen-

This article was published Online First April 28, 2018. James Gordon, Department of Psychology, Saudi University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to James Gordon, Saudi University, Dubai, UAE.

1066

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

FAST AND SLOW READERS AND SPATIAL FREQUENCY CONTENT

tation directly from the visual input. In this way, high lexical quality is based on the availability of accurate lexical representations which can be accessed efficiently during reading (Perfetti, 2007), and other researchers have suggested that such enhanced lexical access may also allow reading to be more automatic (Ruthruff, Allen, Lien, & Grabbe, 2008). In contrast, the lexical representations of slow readers are underspecified such that the stored orthographic information defining a particular word is imprecise, and rapid bottom-up reading is prevented (e.g., Andrews, 2008, 2012; Perfetti, 1992, 2007). Instead, readers with poor lexical representations risk retrieving imprecise or incomplete lexical information, resulting in the need to reallocate more attention and working memory capacity to word-level processes (Perfetti, 2007). However, the nature of the visual input that contributes to fast and slow skilled reading ability is not yet completely clear, and previous discussions have generally addressed the role of letter identities and letter positions in this input (e.g., Andrews, 2008, 2012; Perfetti, 1992, 2007). But as we have seen, text contains more basic information in the form of spatial frequencies, and many researchers argue that access to lexical representations may be achieved using a range of different spatial frequencies, even when only coarse information pro-vided by low spatial frequencies is used (e.g., Allen et al., 2009; Jordan, 1990, 1995; Patching & Jordan, 2005a,2005b). Indeed, whereas high spatial frequencies are conveyed relatively slowly by parvocellular pathways, low spatial frequencies are conveyed by fast magnocellular pathways and so may provide especially rapid activa-tion of lexical entries (for a review, see Hegde, 2008). Consequently, it could be the case that fast and slow skilled adult readers differ in their abilities to use the spatial frequency content of text and that the coarse visual input of low spatial frequencies provides a particularly special advantage for fast readers. Although numerous studies have investigated the spatial frequency sensitivities shown by dyslexic and nondyslexic readers (for a review, see Skottun, 2000), the effectiveness of the spatial frequency content of text for fast and slow skilled adult reading remains to be revealed. So far, direct information on this issue has been provided by Patching and Jordan (2005a), and their findings suggest that briefly presented single words, filtered to contain only certain spatial frequencies, are identified equally accurately by fast and slow readers. But identification of brief single words is not textual reading, and a wealth of

1067

research shows that eye movement behavior intrinsic to normal reading is sensitive to differences in reading performance (e.g., Ashby, Rayner, & Clifton, 2005; Kuperman, & Van Dyke, 2011; Rayner, 2009; Rayner et al., 2010). Indeed, recent investigations (Jordan, McGowan & Paterson, 2012, 2014; Paterson, McGowan, & Jordan, 2012, 2013a,2013b) found that when lines of text are filtered so that only certain spatial frequencies remain, readers use a broad range of different spatial frequencies, and different spatial frequencies produce different patterns of eye movement behavior. But these studies assessed the role of spatial frequencies generally in reading, and the effectiveness of spatial frequencies specifically for fast and slow skilled adult readers remains to be addressed.

Accordingly, the present research used reading times and eyemovement measures to investigate the effectiveness of different spatial frequencies for fast and slow skilled adult reading by presenting sentences as normal, or filtered to contain only very low, low, medium, high, or very high spatial frequencies (see Figure 1). Aspects of this work were necessarily exploratory and making too many predictions would be over speculative. But if fast reading relies on detailed analyses of orthographic content (as previous discussions of the lexical quality hypothesis suggest), filtered displays should show an advantage for fast readers that is maximal when spatial frequencies provide this level of detail (in displays showing medium to very high spatial frequencies) and this advantage should be greatly reduced (or even absent) with lower spatial-frequency displays. On the other hand, and in line with the points we have raised, if the effective use of lower spatial frequencies is an influential characteristic of fast reading, an advantage for fast readers over slow readers should also be present for lower spatial frequency displays. Indeed, because lower spatial frequencies are processed faster, these spatial frequencies may be especially important for fast reading and so may show an even larger advantage for fast readers over slow.

Method Participants Thirty participants (aged 18 to 30 years) from the University of Leicester took part in the study and were screened for reading

Normal Very Low Low Medium High Very High Figure 1. Examples of the types of display used in the experiment. The figure shows a sentence displayed as normal and filtered to contain only very low, low, medium, high, or very high spatial frequencies. The visual appearance of the filtered displays shown in the figure is approximate due to variations in display resolution and print medium.

1068

GORDON

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

speed. All participants were native English speakers and had normal or corrected-to-normal vision, as determined by BaileyLovie (Bailey & Lovie, 1980), Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS; Ferris & Bailey, 1996), and Pelli-Robson (Pelli, Robson, & Wilkins, 1988) assessments (see Jordan, McGowan, & Paterson, 2011). In addition, vocabulary was assessed using the Nelson-Denny vocabulary test (Brown, Fishco, & Hanna, 1993). Following previous practice (e.g., Jackson & McClelland, 1979; Patching & Jordan, 2005a,2005b; see also Rayner et al., 2010), fast and slow readers were identified by their effective reading speed, which was calculated for each participant by multiplying reading speed in words per min (wpm) by the proportion of comprehension questions answered correctly. To do this, four passages (mean length 526 words) were presented on a high-definition display. Participants were instructed to read all four passages normally and each passage was followed by six multiple-choice questions that assessed comprehension. As expected for a population of skilled adult readers, all effective reading speeds were within normal parameters, ranging from 226 to 443 wpm. Fast readers were classified as the upper 50% of this range (15 participants) and slow readers were classified as the lower 50% (15 participants), and so effective reading speeds were 325 to 443 wpm for fast readers and 226 to 318 wpm for slow readers. Compared with fast readers, slow readers read test passages more slowly, t(28) 2.65, p .01, r .44, and had lower comprehension accuracy, t(28) 3.55, p

.01, r .54. In addition, compared with fast readers, slow readers scored lower on the Nelson-Denny vocabulary test, t(28) 3.33, p .01, r .52. However, fast and slow readers did not differ on any tests of visual abilities (all ts 1.3; see Table 1).

Stimuli and Design Stimuli for the experiment consisted of 120 sentences (see Paterson et al., 2012). Each sentence was displayed in one of six display conditions, shown entirely as normal or filtered to leave one of 5 different, 1-octave wide bands of spatial frequencies with low- and high-pass cut-off frequencies of 1.65–3.3, 2.6 –5.2, 5.0 – 10.0, 8.3–16.6, and 10.3–20.6 cycles per degree (see Figure 1). These five bands were termed very low, low, medium, high, and very high. All 120 sentences were sampled in a pseudorandom fashion so that each participant was shown a different selection of 20 sentences in each of the 6 display conditions, without repetition of any sentence for any participant, and all sentences were shown equally often in each condition over the experiment. Sentences were shown to each participant in a randomized order. Additional sentences (two per condition) were used as practice items at the start of each session.

Apparatus and Procedure Eye movements were recorded using an Eyelink 2K towermounted eye-tracker with chin and forehead rest. Viewing was binocular and each participant’s right eye movements were sampled at 1000 Hz using pupil-tracking and corneal reflection. Sentences were displayed on a high-definition 19 in. monitor and a 4letter word subtended approximately 1° (normal size for reading; Rayner & Pollatsek, 1989). The eye-tracker was calibrated at the beginning of the experiment. On each trial, participants fixated a location on the left of the screen, and a sentence was then presented, with its first letter at the fixation location. Participants were instructed to read normally and for comprehension and answered a two alternative forced-choice comprehension question after each sentence.

Results Participants generally showed high levels of performance on the sentence comprehension questions and no differences in compre-hension were observed between reading abilities for any of the six display types, F 1.10. Moreover, all spatial frequencies (except for very low) produced reading comprehension scores (low 93%; medium 96%; high 95%; very high 92%) that were no different from that obtained with normal displays (95%; all ps .27) and although, as expected, very low spatial frequencies produced a lower level of comprehension (61%) than normal displays (p .01), this level was still above chance (p .01). Sentence reading times, number of fixations, fixation durations, number of regressions, progressive saccade lengths, and regressive saccade lengths are reported in Table 2 and reading times are shown graphically in Figure 2. The data for each measure were analyzed using Analyses of Variance with factors reading ability (fast, slow) and display (normal, very low, low, medium, high, very high), with errors computed across participants (F1) and sentences (F2). Following each analysis, post hoc comparisons (Bonferronicorrected t tests) examined effects more closely.

Reading Times Analyses of reading times showed main effects of reading 2 ability, F1(1, 28) 52.06, p .001, p .65, F2(1, 118) 403.72, p .001, 2 p .77, and display, F1(5, 140) 64.29, p 2 2 .001, p .70, F2(5,590) 483.74, p .001, p .80, and an interaction, 2 2 F1(5, 140) 6.46, p .001, p .19, F2(5,590) 37.37, p .001, p .24. For fast and slow readers, pairwise comparisons showed reading times did not differ from normal for medium, high, or very high displays but were longer for low and very low than for all other displays (all ps .01). However, reading times were shorter for fast readers than for slow readers for

Table 1 Visual and Vocabulary Performance of Fast and Slow Readers Reading ability

High contrast acuity (Near)

High contrast acuity (Distant)

Low contrast acuity (Near)

Low contrast acuity (Distant)

Fast Slow

20/20.6 20/20.4

20/21.2 20/23.4

20/26.6 20/27.9

20/32.8 20/33.2

Contrast sensitivity Vocabulary 1.95 1.95

92% 80%

1069

FAST AND SLOW READERS AND FREQUENCY CONTENT

Table 2 Mean Reading Times and Mean Eye Movement Measures for Fast and Slow Readers in Each Display Condition Display condition Reading ability

Normal

Very Low

Low

Medium

High

Very High

Fast Slow Fast Slow Fast Slow Fast Slow Fast Slow Fast Slow

2325 (150) 3272 (128) 10.3 (2.7) 13.4 (3.5) 217 (4) 241 (8) 1.9 (.3) 3.0 (.3) 10.4 (.4) 10.0 (.4) 17.2 (1.1) 20.4 (1.7)

5430 (676) 9219 (682) 15.2 (3.9) 22.7 (5.9) 336 (12) 383 (12) 3.6 (.6) 7.1 (1.1) 9.2 (1.1) 8.1 (.4) 10.8 (.4) 14.0 (1.0)

4595 (271) 7060 (319) 15.7 (4.1) 21.7 (5.6) 280 (6) 310 (10) 3.7 (.4) 5.7 (.3) 8.8 (.4) 8.4 (.2) 11.6 (.4) 12.8 (.9)

2780 (144) 3832 (183) 11.7 (3.0) 14.7 (3.8) 233 (4) 256 (7) 2.2 (.3) 3.3 (.3) 9.6 (.4) 8.4 (.2) 15.6 (.9) 17.6 (1.0)

2873 (163) 4051 (169) 11.9 (3.1) 15.4 (4.0) 238 (6) 259 (8) 2.1 (.3) 3.2 (.3) 9.2 (.4) 9.2 (.3) 16.4 (.9) 18.8 (1.2)

3138 (201) 4512 (230) 12.4 (3.2) 16.0 (4.1) 250 (7) 276 (9) 2.1 (.3) 3.4 (.3) 8.8 (.4) 8.4 (.3) 14.7 (1.0) 23.0 (1.5)

Reading times (ms) Number of fixations Fixation durations (ms)

Progressive saccade lengths (in characters) Regressive saccade lengths (in characters)

each display (all ps .01) and while this advantage for fast readers was similar for normal, medium, high, and very high displays (ps .05), it was substantially larger for low and very low displays (ps

.01).

Eye Movement Measures Eye movement measures complemented the findings for reading times (see Tables 2 and 3). In particular, main effects of reading ability indicated that fast readers made fixations that were fewer in number and shorter in duration, and regressions that were fewer in number and shorter in length (progressive saccades were slightly longer overall for fast readers but not significantly so). Main effects of display were also found for all eye movement measures (see Tables 2 and 3) and interacted with reading ability for fixation numbers, fixation durations, regressions, and progressive saccade lengths (effects of reading ability on regressive saccade lengths were unchanged across displays). Compared with slow readers, fast readers made fixations that were fewer and shorter in duration and regressions that were fewer and shorter in length for all displays (ps .01), and longer progressive saccades for very low displays (ps .01). For fixation numbers, the extent of the difference between fast and slow readers was similar for normal, medium, high, and very high displays (ps

Time (ms)

Fast Readers

Re adi ng

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminatedbroadly.

Number of regressions

Slow Readers

10000 8000 6000 2000 4000

0 Normal

Very Low

Low

Medium

High

Very High

Display Figure 2. Mean reading times (including standard error bars) for fast and slow readers.

.05) but larger for low and very low (ps .01); for fixation durations, regressions, and progressive saccade lengths, the fastslow difference was similar for normal, low, medium, high, and very high displays (ps .05) but larger for very low (ps .01); and for regressive saccade lengths, the fast-slow difference remained unchanged across displays (ps .05).

Discussion These findings show that both fast and slow skilled adult readers can use a range of spatial frequencies for textual reading. Indeed, for each reading ability, reading times for normal text were maintained even when text contained only medium, high, and very high spatial frequencies, and reading occurred even for low and very low spatial frequencies, albeit more slowly. However, reading times were substantially shorter for fast readers than for slow readers for all types of display, and although the extent of this advantage for fast readers was similar for normal, medium, high, and very high spatial frequencies, it was considerably larger for low and very low spatial frequencies. Differences between fast and slow readers were also present in the eye movement record, where fast readers made fewer and shorter fixa-tions, fewer and shorter regressions, and longer progressive saccades than slow readers, and fast-slow differences were more apparent when text contained lower spatial frequencies. The indication, therefore, is that fast readers used spatial frequencies more effectively for word identification and eye guidance, and this advantage was greatest for lower spatial frequencies. The greater effectiveness of medium and higher spatial frequencies for both reading abilities, and the normal levels of performance produced by these frequencies, suggest that fast and slow readers both benefit from relatively detailed analyses of text, allowing perception of the precise form and location of individual letters. This is consistent with views concerning the role of individual letter information gen-erally in reading (e.g., Davis, 2010; Pelli, Farell, & Moore, 2003) and with the lexical quality hypothesis, which proposes that fast reading benefits from high-quality lexical representations in which ortho-graphic information defining a particular word is stored precisely (e.g., Andrews, 2008, 2012; Perfetti, 1992, 2007). But the greatest difference between fast and slow readers was the effectiveness of lower spatial frequencies, and the implication from these findings is that although lower spatial frequencies alone are

1070

GORDAN

Table 3 F1 and F2 Statistics for Eye-Movement Measures of Reading Eye movement measure

Source of variance

Number of fixations

Reading ability Display type Reading Ability Reading ability Display type Reading Ability Reading ability Display type Reading Ability Reading ability Display type Reading Ability Reading ability Display type Reading Ability

Fixation durations

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not

of its allied publishers.

tobedisseminatedbroadly.

Number of regressions Progressive Saccade lengths Regressive Saccade lengths

p

.05.

p

.01.

p

Display Type Display Type Display Type Display Type Display Type

df

F1 Value

p

2

df

1,28 5,140 5,140 1,28 5,140 5,140 1,28 5,140 5,140 1,28 5,140 5,140 1,28 5,140 5,140

31.11 27.84 2.63 8.22 218.80 2.26 14.00 21.93 3.66 1.63 7.74 3.11 4.18 32.38 .83

.53 .50 .09 .23 .89 .08 .33 .44 .12 .06 .21 .10 .15 .54 .03

1,118 5,590 5,590 1,118 5,590 5,590 1,118 5,590 5,590 1,118 5,590 5,590 1,118 5,590 5,590

F2 Value 261.85 174.51 11.61 332.24 458.11 4.62 203.04 86.71 14.47 32.29 68.51 4.96 15.62 60.24 1.15

2

p

.69 .60 .09 .74 .80 .04 .63 .42 .11 .22 .37 .04 .12 .34 .01

.001.

generally less effective than other spatial frequencies for reading, their influence represents an unusually important component of the distinction between fast and slow readers. This resonates with the view that lower spatial frequencies reach cortical areas before higher spatial frequencies (e.g., Allen et al., 2009; Jordan et al., 2012, 2014; Patching & Jordan 2005a,2005b), and so, compared with slow readers, fast readers may be especially able to use lower spatial frequencies to help gain lexical access more rapidly. Indeed, this ability for fast readers could provide an effective bottom-up basis for influences of predictability that many argue are also part of fast reading (e.g., Hawelka et al., 2015; Hersch & Andrews, 2012; Long et al., 1994; Murray & Burke, 2003). In this sense, if the coarse information provided by lower spatial frequencies in normal text is sometimes insufficient alone to access the correct lexical representation (as the reading performance and comprehension scores observed for lower spatial frequencies suggests), fast readers may be adept at combining the rapid processing of a word’s lower spatial frequencies with the context in which the word is encountered to provide top-down predictions of the word’s identity and (if required) integrate this combined information with detail provided by parvocellular pathways. Indeed, and in contrast to higher spatial frequencies, lower spatial frequencies can be encoded from a wide range of locations along a line of text during each fixational pause (in foveal, parafoveal, and peripheral vision; e.g., Jordan et al., 2012; Paterson et al., 2013a,2013b; see also Jordan, McGowan, & Paterson, 2013; Jordan, McGowan, Kurtev, & Paterson, 2016), and so the more effective use of lower spatial frequencies by fast readers may indicate a pragmatic response to the nature of visual sensory input and the complex demands of the process of reading. In sum, the findings of this study provide fresh insight into the nature of fast and slow skilled adult reading using a technique in which the effectiveness of different spatial frequency bands in text was determined individually to avoid contamination from other spatial frequencies. Further research can now take place to show how the influences of these spatial frequencies integrate when reading normal text, where different bands of spatial frequencies are naturally present simultaneously and so may exert influences on reading ability either in parallel or in close succession during reading. In addition, the

procedures adopted in the present study can also be used to develop fresh insight into the reading abilities of other groups, like dyslexics, where the role of different spatial frequencies also remains to be fully resolved. Indeed, there seems little doubt that continued investigations of the relationship between spatial frequencies and reading will provide further, crucial information about the underlying nature of reading abilities, and this serves to emphasize the importance of investigating textual reading from a visual perspective as well as from the perspective of higher-order cognitive functions.

References Allen, P. A., Smith, A. F., Lien, M. C., Kaut, K. P., & Canfield, A. (2009). A multistream model of visual word recognition. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 71, 281–296. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/APP.71.2.281 Andrews, S. (2008). Lexical expertise and reading skill. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 49, 249 –281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ S0079-7421(08)00007-8 Ashby, J., Rayner, K., & Clifton, C. (2005). Eye movements of highly skilled and average readers: Differential effects of frequency and predictability. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 1065– 1086. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02724980443000476 Ashby, J., Yang, J., Evans, K. H., & Rayner, K. (2012). Eye movements and the perceptual span in silent and oral reading. Attention, Perception & Psychophys-ics, 74, 634–640. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-012-0277-0

Bailey, I. L., & Lovie, J. E. (1980). The design and use of a new nearvision chart. American Journal of Optometry and Physiological Optics, 57, 378–387. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1097/00006324-198006000-00011 Blakemore, C., & Campbell, F. W. (1969). Adaptation to spatial stimuli. The Journal of Physiology, 200, 11–13. Brown, J. I., Fishco, V. V., & Hanna, G. (1993). The Nelson-Denny reading test. Itasca, IL: The Riverside Publishing Company. Davis, C. J. (2010). The spatial coding model of visual word identification. Psychological Review, 117, 713–758. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ a0019738 Ferris, F. L., III, & Bailey, I. (1996). Standardizing the measurement of visual acuity for clinical research studies: Guidelines from the Eye Care

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

1071 FAST AND SLOW READERS AND FREQUENCY CONTENT Jordan, T.R., McGowan, V.A., Kurtev, S., & Paterson, K.B. (2017). Sheen, M. & Jordan, T.R. (2016). Believing is Seeing: A perspective on Investigating the effectiveness of spatial frequencies to the left and right of perceiving images of objects on the Shroud of Turin. Archive for the central vision during reading: Evidence from reading times and eye Psychology of Religion, 44, 74-77. movements. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 807. Paterson, K.B., Almabruk, A.A.A., McGowan, V.A., White, S.J., Jordan, Li, L., Li, S., Wang, J., McGowan, V.A., Liu, P., Jordan, T.R., & Paterson, T.R. (2015). Effects of word length on eye movement control: The K.B. (2017). Aging and the optimal viewing position effect in visual evidence from Arabic. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 1443word recognition: Evidence from English. Psychology and Aging, 32, 1450. in press. Jordan, T.R., Sheen, M., Abedipour, L., & Paterson, K.B. (2015). Seeing Jordan, T.R., McGowan, V.A., Kurtev, S., & Paterson, K.B. (2016). A inscriptions on the Shroud of Turin: The role of psychological further look at postview effects in reading: An eye-movements study of influences in the perception of writing. PLoS ONE, influences from the left of fixation. Journal of Experimental journal.pone.0136860. Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 296-307. Sheen, M. & Jordan, T.R. (2015). Effects of contextual information on Jordan, T.R., Dixon, J., McGowan, V.A., Kurtev, S., & Paterson, K.B. seeing pareidolic religious inscriptions on an artefact: Implications for (2016). Fast and slow readers and the effectiveness of the spatial the Shroud of Turin. Perception, 44, 1427-1430. frequency content of text: Evidence from reading times and eye Paterson, K.B., Read J., McGowan, V.A., & Jordan, T.R. (2015). movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception Children and adults both see “pirates” in “parties”: Letter-position and Performance, 42, 1066-1071. effects for developing readers and skilled adult readers. Developmental Jordan, T.R., Dixon, J., McGowan, V.A., Kurtev, S., & Paterson, K.B. Science, 18, 335-343. (2016). Effects of spatial frequencies on word identification by fast and Jordan, T.R., McGowan, V.A., & Paterson, K.B. (2014). Reading with slow readers: Evidence from eye movements. Frontiers in Psychology, filtered fixations: Adult-age differences in the effectiveness of lowhttp://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01433 level properties of text within central vision. Psychology and Aging, Sheen, M. & Jordan, T.R. (2016). Believing is Seeing: A perspective on 29, 229-235. perceiving images of objects on the Shroud of Turin. Archive for the Jordan, T.R., Almabruk, A.A.A., Gadalla, E.A., McGowan, V.A., White, Psychology of Religion, 44, 74-77. S.J., Abedipour, L., & Paterson, K.B. (2014). Reading direction and Paterson, K.B., Almabruk, A.A.A., McGowan, V.A., White, S.J., Jordan, the central perceptual span: Evidence from Arabic and English. T.R. (2015). Effects of word length on eye movement control: The Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 505-511. evidence from Arabic. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 1443Paterson, K.B., McGowan, V.A., White, S.J., Malik, S., Abedipour, L., & 1450. Jordan, T.R. (2014). Reading direction and the central perceptual span Jordan, T.R., Sheen, M., Abedipour, L., & Paterson, K.B. (2015). Seeing in Urdu and English. PLoS ONE, 10.1371/journal.pone.0088358. inscriptions on the Shroud of Turin: The role of psychological Jordan, T.R., Sheen, M., Abedipour, L. & Paterson, K.B. (2014). Visual influences in the perception of writing. PLoS ONE, speech perception in foveal and extrafoveal vision: Further implications journal.pone.0136860. for divisions in hemispheric projections. PLoS ONE, 9(7): e98273. Sheen, M. & Jordan, T.R. (2015). Effects of contextual information on McGowan, V.A., White, S.J., Paterson, K.B., & Jordan, T.R. (2014). seeing pareidolic religious inscriptions on an artefact: Implications for Aging and the use of inter-word spaces during reading. Psychonomic the Shroud of Turin. Perception, 44, 1427-1430. Bulletin & Review, 21, 740-747. Paterson, K.B., Read J., McGowan, V.A., & Jordan, T.R. (2015). Paterson, K.B., McGowan, V.A., & Jordan, T.R. (2013). Filtered text Children and adults both see “pirates” in “parties”: Letter-position reveals adult age differences in reading: Evidence from eye movements. effects for developing readers and skilled adult readers. Developmental Psychology and Aging, 28, 352-364. Science, 18, 335-343. Jordan, T.R., McGowan, V.A., & Paterson, K.B. (2013). What’s left? An Jordan, T.R., McGowan, V.A., & Paterson, K.B. (2014). Reading with eye-movement study of the influence of interword spaces to the left of filtered fixations: Adult-age differences in the effectiveness of lowfixation during reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 551-557. level properties of text within central vision. Psychology and Aging, Paterson, K.B., McGowan, V.A., & Jordan, T.R. (2013). Aging and 29, 229235. control of binocular fixations during reading. Psychology and Aging, Jordan, T.R., Almabruk, A.A.A., Gadalla, E.A., McGowan, V.A., White, 28, 789-795. S.J., Abedipour, L., & Paterson, K.B. (2014). Reading direction and Paterson, K.B., McGowan, V.A., & Jordan, T.R. (2013). Effects of adult the central perceptual span: Evidence from Arabic and English. aging on reading filtered text: Evidence from eye movements. Peerj, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 505-511. doi:10.7717/peerj.6310.1371. Paterson, K.B., McGowan, V.A., White, S.J., Malik, S., Abedipour, L., & Jordan, T.R. (2013). Visual speech perception in foveal and extrafoveal Jordan, T.R. (2014). Reading direction and the central perceptual span vision: Implications for divisions in hemispheric projection. Frontiers in Urdu and English. PLoS ONE, 10.1371/journal.pone.0088358. in Language Sciences, 22, 223-542. Jordan, T.R., Sheen, M., Abedipour, L. & Paterson, K.B. (2014). Visual Back, E., & Jordan, T.R. (2013). Revealing variations in perception of speech perception in foveal and extrafoveal vision: Further implications mental states from dynamic facial expressions: A cautionary note. for divisions in hemispheric projections. PLoS ONE, 9(7): e98273. PLoS ONE, 9(1): e84395. Sheen, M., AlJassmi, M., & Jordan, T.R. (2017). Teaching about Paterson, K.B., & Jordan, T.R. (2013). What science can tell us about psychological disorders A case for using discussion boards in the reading calligraphy. The Scribe, 95, 11-13. classroom. Teaching of Psychology, 44, 74-77. McGowan, V.A., Paterson, K.B., & Jordan, T.R. (2013). Age-related Jordan, T.R., McGowan, V.A., Kurtev, S., & Paterson, K.B. (2016). A visual impairments and perceiving linguistic stimuli: The rarity of further look at postview effects in reading: An eye-movements study of assessing the visual abilities of older adults in linguistic research. influences from the left of fixation. Journal of Experimental Experimental Aging Research, 39, 70-79. Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 296-307. Paterson, K.B., McGowan, V.A., & Jordan, T.R. (2012). Eye movements Jordan, T.R., Dixon, J., McGowan, V.A., Kurtev, S., & Paterson, K.B. reveal effects of visual content on eye guidance and lexical access (2016). Fast and slow readers and the effectiveness of the spatial during reading. PLoS ONE, 7(8): e41766. frequency content of text: Evidence from reading times and eye doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0041766. movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception Jordan, T.R., McGowan, V.A., & Paterson, K.B. (2012). Reading with a and Performance, 42, 1066-1071. filtered fovea: The influence of visual quality at the point of fixation Jordan, T.R., Dixon, J., McGowan, V.A., Kurtev, S., & Paterson, K.B. during reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 1078-1084. (2016). Effects of spatial frequencies on word identification by fast and Jordan, T.R., Almabruk, A.A.A., McGowan, V.A., & Paterson, K.B. (2011). Evaluating hemispheric divisions in processing fixated words: slow readers: Evidence from eye movements. Frontiers in Psychology, The evidence from Arabic. Cortex, 42, 992-997. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01433 Jordan, T.R., Fuggetta, G., Paterson, K.B., Kurtev, S. & Xu, M. (2011).

A ord recognition. PLoS ONE, 6(9): e23957, doi:10.1371/ n journal.pone.0023957. Jordan, T.R., McGowan, V.A., & Paterson, K.B. (2011). Out of sight, out E of mind: The rarity of assessing and reporting participants’ R visual abilities when studying perception of linguistic stimuli. P Perception, 40, 873-876. Jordan, T.R., & Thomas, S.M. (2011). When half a face is as good as a a whole: Effects of simple substantial occlusion on visual and s audiovisual speech perception. Attention, Perception, & s Psychophysics, 73, 2270-2285. e Almabruk, A.A.A., Paterson, K.B., McGowan, V.A., & Jordan, T.R., s (2011). Evaluating effects of divided hemispheric processing s on word recognition in foveal and extrafoveal displays: The m evidence from Arabic. PLoS ONE, 6(4): e18131, doi:10.1371/ e journal.pone.0018131. n Sherman, S.M., & Jordan, T.R. (2011). Word frequency effects in longt term semantic priming and false memory. British Journal of Psychology, 102, 559-568. o Jordan, T.R., & Paterson, K.B. (2010). Where is the evidence for split f fovea processing in word recognition? Neuropsychologia, 48, 2782-2783. h Jordan, T.R., Paterson, K.B., Kurtev, S., & Xu, M. (2010a). Re-evaluating e split-fovea processing in word recognition: Effects of word m length during monocular viewing. Cortex, 46, 100-105. i Jordan, T.R., Paterson, K.B., Kurtev, S., & Xu, M. (2010b). Res evaluating split-fovea processing in word recognition: Effects p of fixation location within words. Cortex, 46, 298-309. h Jordan, T.R., Paterson, K.B., & Almabruk, A.A.A. (2010). Revealing the e superior perceptibility of words in Arabic. Perception, 39, r 426-428. i Jordan, T.R., & Abedipour, L. (2010). The importance of laughing in c your face: Influences of visual laughter on auditory laughter perception. Perception, 39, 1283-1285. p Paterson, K.B., & Jordan, T.R. (2010). Effects of increased letter spacing r on word identification and eye guidance during reading. o Memory & Cognition, 38, 502-512. j Jordan, T.R., & Paterson, K.B. (2009). Re-evaluating split-fovea e processing in word recognition: A critical assessment of recent c research. Neuropsychologia, 47, 2341-2353. t Jordan, T.R., Paterson, K.B., Kurtev, S., & Xu, M. (2009). Do fixation i cues ensure fixation accuracy in split-fovea studies of word o recognition? Neuropsychologia, 47, 2004-2007. n Jordan, T.R., Paterson, K.B., & Kurtev, S. (2009). Re-evaluating splits fovea processing in word recognition: Hemispheric dominance, retinal location, and the word-nonword effect. Cognitive, i Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 113-121. n Jordan, T.R., Paterson, K.B., & Stachurski, M. (2009). Re-evaluating split-fovea processing in word recognition: Effects of word f length. Cortex, 45, 495-505. o Patching, G.R., & Jordan, T.R. (2005b). Spatial frequency sensitivity v differences between adults of good and poor reading ability. e Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 46, 2219-2224. a Thomas, S.M., & Jordan, T.R. (2004). Contributions of oral and extral oral facial motion to visual and audiovisual speech perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, a n 873-888. d Jordan, T.R., & Patching, G.R. (2004). What do lateralized displays tell us about visual word perception? A cautionary indication from the e word-letter effect. Neuropsychologia, 42, 1504-1514. x Darker, I.T., & Jordan, T.R. (2004). Perception of words and nonwords in t the upper and lower visual fields. Brain and Language, 89, 593-600. r Monteiro, A., & Jordan, T.R. (2004). Implementing communication a between Windows PCs and test equipment using RS-232 and Borland f C++ Builder. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, o v 36, 107-112. e Jordan, T.R., Thomas, S.M., Patching, G.R., & Scott-Brown, K.C. (2003). a Assessing the importance of letter pairs in initial, exterior, and interior l positions in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 29, 883-893. (Issue also includes peer w commentary on this article).

Jordan, T.R., Thomas, S.M., & Patching, G.R. (2003). Assessing the importance of letter pairs in reading: Parafoveal processing is not the only view. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 29, 900-903. Jordan, T.R., Redwood, M., & Patching, G.R. (2003). Effects of form familiarity on perception of words, pseudowords and nonwords in the two cerebral hemispheres. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 537548. Jordan, T.R., & Patching, G.R. (2003a). Perceptual interactions between bilaterally presented words: What you get is often not what you see. Neuropsychology, 17, 566-577. Jordan, T.R., & Patching, G.R. (2003b). Assessing effects of stimulus orientation on perception of lateralized words and nonwords. Neuropsychologia, 41, 1693-1702. Jordan, T.R., Patching, G.R., & Thomas, S.M. (2003a). Assessing the role of hemispheric specialization, serial-position processing and retinal eccentricity in lateralized word perception. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 49-71. (Issue also includes peer commentary on this article). Jordan, T.R., Patching, G.R., & Thomas, S.M. (2003b). Asymmetries and eccentricities in studies of lateralized word recognition: A response to Nazir. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 81-89. Jordan, T.R., & Monteiro, A. (2003). Generating anagrams from multiple core strings employing user-defined vocabularies and orthographic parameters. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 35, 129-135. McCotter, M., & Jordan, T.R. (2003). The role of facial colour and luminance in visual and audiovisual speech perception. Perception, 32, 921-936. Jordan, T.R., & Thomas, S.M. (2002). In search of perceptual influences of sentence context on word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 28, 34–45. Monteiro, A., & Jordan, T.R. (2002). Hemiface mirroring: A new approach to reducing bandwidth requirements of audiovisual telecommunication. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 12, 130-135. Jordan, T.R., & Thomas, S.M. (2001). Effects of horizontal viewing angle on visual and audiovisual speech recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and p Performance, 27, 1386-1403. McCotter, M., & Jordan, T.R. (2001). Investigating the role of luminance boundaries in visual and audiovisual speech recognition using line drawn faces. Proceedings of Auditory-Visual Speech Processing, 143-149. Thomas, S.M., & Jordan, T.R. (2001). Techniques for the production of point-light and fully-illuminated video displays from identical recordings. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 33, 218-224. Jordan, T.R., Patching, G., & Milner, A.D. (2000). Lateralized word recognition: Assessing the role of hemispheric specialization, modes of lexical access and perceptual asymmetry. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1192-1208. Jordan, T.R., McCotter, M., & Thomas, S.M. (2000). Visual and audiovisual speech perception with color and gray scale facial images. Perception & Psychophysics, 7, 1394-1404. Jordan, T.R., & Sergeant, P.C. (2000). Effects of distance on visual and audio-visual speech recognition. Language and Speech, 43, 107-124. Scott-Brown, K.C., & Jordan, T.R. (2000). A low-cost, accurate method of producing large quantities of digitally filtered images. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 32, 458-463. Ischemic Optic Neuropathy Decompression Trial Research Group (2000). Ischemic Optic Neuropathy Decompression Trial: 24-month update. Archives of Ophthalmology, 118, 793-797. Jordan, T.R., & Thomas, S.M. (1999). Memory for normal and distorted pictures: Modulation of the ERP repetition effect. Journal of Per for ma nce , 27, 13 8614 03.

Jord

P C. (1999). The illusory letters phenomenon: An illustration of s graphemic restoration in visual word recognition. Perception, y 28, 1413-1416. c Jordan, T.R., Patching, G., & Milner, A.D. (1998). Central fixations are h inadequately controlled by instructions alone: Implications for o studying cerebral asymmetry. Quarterly Journal of p Experimental Psychology, 51A, 371-391. h Jordan T.R., & Sergeant, P.C. (1998). The role of image size in visual and y audiovisual speech recognition. In R. Campbell, B. Dodd, & s D. Burnham (Eds.) Hearing by Eye II. Perspectives and i directions in research on audiovisual aspects of language o processing, 155-176. l Patching, G.R. & Jordan, T.R. (1998). Increasing the benefits of eyeo tracking devices in divided visual field studies of cerebral g asymmetry. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & y Computers, 30, 643-650. , Jordan, T.R., & Bevan, K.M. (1997). Seeing and hearing rotated faces: Influences of facial orientation on visual and audiovisual 1 speech recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: 3 Human Perception and Performance, 23, 388-403. , Jordan, T.R. (1997). Optimizing word recognition in driving environments. Proceedings of Cognitive Ergonomics Society, 2 37-45. 2 Jordan, T.R., Bevan, K.M., & Thomas, S.M. (1997). Letter fragment 4 masks, non-letter-fragment fields, and the word-letter phenomenon. Memory, Cognition, and Language 4, 55-77 2 Jordan, T.R., Sergeant, P.C., Martin, C., Thomas, S.M., & Thow, E. 3 (1997). Effects of horizontal viewing angle on visual and 3 audiovisual speech perception. IEEE Computational . Cybernetics and Simulation, 1626-1631. Jordan, T.R. & Bevan, K.M. (1996). Position-specific masking and the a word-letter phenomenon: Re-examining the evidence from the n Reicher-Wheeler paradigm. Journal of Experimental , Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 14161433. TJordan, T.R., & Thomas, S.M. (1996). Memory for normal and distorted . pictures. Memory, Cognition, and Language 3, 124-147. RJordan, T.R. (1995). Perceiving exterior letters of words: Differential . influences of letter fragment and non-letter-fragment masks. , Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 512-530. TDickersin, K., Everett, D.,..Jordan, T.R., et al. (1995). Optic nerve h decompression surgery for non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic o neuropathy (NAION) is not effective and may be harmful. m Journal of the American Medical Association 8, 625-632. a Jordan, T.R., Smith, L.S., & Phillips, W.A. (1995). Exploring the s structure of the word recognition module: Psychological and , computational investigations. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10, 393-400. S Jordan, T.R. (1994). Optimising legibility of high-density linguistic . information. In J. Columbine (Ed.), The Psychophysics of M Reading, 45-56. . Jordan, T.R., & Bevan, K.M. (1994). Word superiority over isolated , letters: The neglected case of forward masking. Memory & Cognition, 22, 133-144. &Jordan, T.R. & de Bruijn, O. (1993). Word superiority over isolated letters: The neglected role of flanking mask-contours. Journal S of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and c Performance, 19, 1-15. o Jordan, T.R. (1992a). Optimising matrices for message presentation. In J. t Summerton et al. (Eds.), Visual and Technical Aspects of t Message Presentation, 133-152. - Jordan, T.R. (1992b). Enhancing word recognition using selective B contrast manipulation. In P. Davis et al. (Eds.), Vehicle Vision, r 26-32. o Buchanan-Smith, H.M. & Jordan, T.R. (1992). An experimental w investigation of the pair-bond in the callitrichid monkey, n Saguinus l. Labiatus. International Journal of Primatology, , 13, 51-72. Smith, P.T., Jordan, T.R., & Sharma, D. (1991). A connectionist model of K word recognition that accounts for interactions between mask . size and word length. Psychological Research, 53, 80-87.

Milner, A.D., Perrett, D.I., Johnston, R., Benson, P.J., Jordan, T.R., et al. (1991). Vision and action in a case of "visual form agnosia". Brain, 114, 405-428. Jordan, T.R. (1990). Presenting words without interior letters: Superiority over single letters and influence of postmask boundaries. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 893-909. Jordan, T.R., & Martin, C.D. (1987). Computer displays: A video monitor modification for removing serial presentation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 167-170. Jordan, T.R., & Martin, C.D. (1987). The importance of visual angle in word recognition: A "shrinking screen" modification for visual displays. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 19, 307-310. Jordan, T.R. (1986). Testing the BOSS hypothesis: Evidence for positioninsensitive orthographic priming in the lexical decision task. Memory & Cognition, 14, 523-532.

Copyright © 2024 DOKUMEN.SITE Inc.