ArticlePsychological science2018
Evidence of Serial Processing in Visual Word Recognition.
Article in Psychological science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- Simultaneous Cortical Responses to Multiple Written Words.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2026Article
- Simultaneous cortical responses to multiple written words.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Negative effects of redundant targets.Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance · 2026Article
- Article
- Lateralized costs of divided attention to faces.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- Spatial selectivity in visual detection suffers when attention is divided.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- The Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Bottom-Up and Top-Down Processing during At-a-Glance Reading.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Article
- Dissociation between Selecting and Orienting Attentional Reading Deficits: A Study in Adults with Epilepsy.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Severe processing capacity limits for sub-lexical features of letter strings.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024Article
- Testing hemifield independence for divided attention in visual object tasks.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Evidence from partially valid cueing that words are processed serially.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2023Article
- The cost of divided attention for detection of simple visual features primarily reflects limits in post-perceptual processing.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
- Parallel phonological processing of Chinese characters revealed by flankers tasks.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Spatial attention in encoding letter combinations.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- A major role for retrieval and/or comparison in the set-size effects of change detection.Journal of vision · 2021Article
- Is there a serial bottleneck in visual object recognition?Journal of vision · 2021Article
- Visual word recognition: Evidence for a serial bottleneck in lexical access.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2020Article
- The link between reading ability and visual spatial attention across development.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2019Article
- You Can't Recognize Two Words Simultaneously.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2019Article
- A neural basis of the serial bottleneck in visual word recognition.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To test the limits of parallel processing in vision, we investigated whether people can recognize two words at once. Participants viewed brief, masked pairs of words and were instructed in advance to judge both of the words (dual-task condition) or just one of the words (single-task condition). For judgments of semantic category, the dual-task deficit was so large that it supported all-or-none serial processing: Participants could recognize only one word and had to guess about the other. Moreover, participants were more likely to be correct about one word if they were incorrect about the other, which also supports a serial-processing model. In contrast, judgments of text color with identical stimuli were consistent with unlimited-capacity parallel processing. Thus, under these conditions, serial processing is necessary to judge the meaning of words but not their physical features. Understanding the implications of this result for natural reading will require further investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.