ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2022
The relationships between reading fluency and different measures of holistic word processing.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Domain Specificity vs. Domain Generality: The Case of Faces and Words.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Developmental emergence of holistic processing in word recognition.Developmental science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently, paradigms in the face recognition literature have been adopted to reveal holistic processing in word recognition. It is unknown, however, whether different measures of holistic word processing share similar underlying mechanisms, and whether fluent word reading relies on holistic word processing. We measured holistic processing effects in three paradigms (composite, configural sensitivity, part-whole) as well as in reading fluency (3DM task: reading aloud high- and low-frequency words and pseudowords). Bin scores were used to combine accuracy and response time variables in the quest for a more comprehensive, reliable, and valid measure of holistic processing. Weak correlations were found between the different holistic processing measures, with only a significant correlation between the configural sensitivity effect and part-whole effect (r = .32) and a trend of a positive correlation between the word composite effect and configural sensitivity effect (r = .21). Of the three holistic processing measures, only one (part-whole effect) correlated with a lexical access measure of 3DM (r = .23). We also performed a principal component analysis (PCA) of performance in the three lists of 3DM, with the second most probably reflecting lexical access processes. There was a tendency for a positive correlation between part-whole bin measure and Component 2 of PCA. We also found a positive correlation between composite aligned in accuracy and Component 2 of PCA.Our results show that different measures of holistic word processing reflect predominantly different mechanisms, and that differences among normal readers in word reading do not seem to depend highly on holistic processing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35556234What 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.