ArticleCognition2023
The transposed word effect is consistent with serial word recognition and varies with reading speed.
Article in Cognition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- The transposed-word effect persists across text orientations in Chinese.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- The impact of case changes on transposed-word effects.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- Word length does not modulate the transposed-word effect in Chinese reading: Testing the OB1-Reader.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Word Trigram Frequency Predicts Failure to Detect Word Transpositions: Implications for Rational Inference in Reading.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2026Article
- Reexamining Transposed-Word Effects in the Grammatical Decision Task.Experimental psychology · 2025Article
- The impact of relative word-length on effects of non-adjacent word transpositions.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- Effects of aging on word position encoding in Chinese reading.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- Flexible word position coding in reading: Roles for attention and memory.Memory & cognition · 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
- 40 Years of Cracking the Orthographic Code: A Special Issue in Honour of Jonathan Grainger's Career.Journal of cognition · 2024Article
- Do Love You Me? Failure to Notice Word Transpositions is Induced by Parallel Word Processing.Journal of cognition · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The scientific study of reading has long been animated by questions of parallel vs. serial processing. Do readers recognize words serially, adding each one sequentially to a representation of the sentence structure? One fascinating phenomenon to emerge from this research is the transposed word effect: when asked to judge whether sentences are grammatical, readers often fail to notice grammatical errors caused by transposing two words. This effect could be evidence that readers recognize multiple words in parallel. Here we provide converging evidence that the transposed word effect is also consistent with serial processing because it occurs robustly when the words in each sentence are presented serially. We further investigated how the effect relates to individual differences in reading speed, to gaze fixation patterns, and to differences in difficulty across sentences. In a pretest, we first measured the natural English reading rate of 37 participants, which varied widely. In a subsequent grammatical decision task, we presented grammatical and ungrammatical sentences in two modes: one with all words presented simultaneously, and the other with single words presented sequentially at each participant's natural rate. Unlike prior studies that used a fixed sequential presentation rate, we found that the magnitude of the transposed word effect was at least as strong in the sequential presentation mode as in the simultaneous mode, for both error rates and response times. Moreover, faster readers were more likely to miss transpositions of words presented sequentially. We argue that these data favor a "noisy channel" model of comprehension in which skilled readers rely on prior knowledge to rapidly infer the meaning of sentences, allowing for apparent errors in spatial or temporal order, even when the individual words are recognized one at a time.
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.