Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36827285›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Omit needless words: Sentence length perception.

Nestor Matthews, Folly Folivi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Nestor MatthewsDepartment of Psychology, Denison University, Granville, OH, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4365-5982
Folly FoliviDepartment of Psychology, Denison University, Granville, OH, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-1419-980X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Short sentences improve readability. Short sentences also promote social justice through accessibility and inclusiveness. Despite this, much remains unknown about sentence length perception-an important factor in producing readable writing. Accordingly, we conducted a psychophysical study using procedures from Signal Detection Theory to examine sentence length perception in naive adults. Participants viewed real-world full-page text samples and judged whether a bolded target sentence contained more or fewer than 17 words. The experiment yielded four findings. First, naïve adults perceived sentence length in real-world text samples quickly (median = 300-400 ms) and precisely (median = ~90% correct). Second, flipping real-world text samples upside-down generated no reaction-time cost and nearly no loss in the precision of sentence length perception. This differs from the large inversion effects that characterize other highly practiced, real-world perceptual tasks involving canonically oriented stimuli, most notably face perception and reading. Third, participants significantly underestimated the length of mirror-reversed sentences-but not upside-down, nor standard sentences. This finding parallels participants' familiarity with commonly occurring left-justified right-ragged text, and suggests a novel demonstration of left-lateralized anchoring in scene syntax. Fourth, error patterns demonstrated that participants achieved their high speed, high precision sentence-length judgments by heuristically counting text lines, not by explicitly counting words. This suggests practical advice for writing instructors to offer students. When copy editing, students can quickly and precisely identify their long sentences via a line-counting heuristic, e.g., "a 17-word sentence spans about 1.5 text lines". Students can subsequently improve a long sentence's readability and inclusiveness by omitting needless words.

Indexed as

SemanticsSpeech PerceptionAdultComprehensionHumansLanguagePerceptionReading

Identifiers

PMID36827285
PMCPMC9955962

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.