ArticleMemory & cognition2026
The processing of multiple letters and multiple words in deaf adults.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Readers utilize both foveal and parafoveal information to recognize letters and words effectively. In the fovea, the ability to identify letters is maximized, resulting in greater accuracy for letters that are directly fixated upon. Conversely, the accuracy of letter identification diminishes in the parafovea. Notably, letters at the beginning and end of words are often recognized more accurately than those in the middle, which yields a W-shaped function in identification accuracy and an M-shaped function in response times. Building upon these observations, word identification rates are higher for strings presented in the foveal area. Due to an attentional bias toward reading direction, there exists a greater ability to identify words in the right parafovea compared to the left. Given that deaf readers display a distinct distribution of visual attention, the present study aims to investigate, using a Rapid Parallel Visual Presentation paradigm, whether deaf readers differ in their ability to identify letters and words. Participants were presented with three-letter nonword and word sequences at foveal and parafoveal positions and instructed to identify post-cued letter and word targets. While both groups demonstrated the W-shaped accuracy function for letter identification, response times for deaf readers were characterized by a distinct M-shaped pattern, particularly for letters in the right visual field (RVF). Hearing participants exhibited a RVF advantage in word identification; however, deaf participants displayed a reduced RVF advantage, suggesting a more bilateral distribution of visual attention during reading. These results indicate that deafness leads to subtle yet significant differences in letter and word identification processes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41139158What 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.