ReviewFrontiers in psychology2024
The Reicher-Wheeler paradigm in word recognition research: a cautionary note on its actual contributions and published misconceptions.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study of word recognition has been influenced greatly by findings obtained when visual stimuli are presented very briefly. Under these conditions, a great deal of evidence suggests that words are perceived better than nonwords, and even single letters, and it is generally accepted that these "word superiority effects" reflect the relative efficiency with which words are perceived. For more than 50 years, a key procedure for establishing these effects has been the Reicher-Wheeler Paradigm in which potentially confounding effects of non-perceptual guesswork are cleverly suppressed. More recently, however, the actual nature of the Reicher-Wheeler paradigm and its contribution to research have become misrepresented in a range of publications, and its use in experiments has been confused and conflated with other, less sophisticated procedures. In this article we describe the actual contributions made by the Reicher-Wheeler Paradigm to word recognition research and show examples of how these important contributions have been misunderstood and misconceived in experiments reported in the recent literature.
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.