ArticleCognitive science2025
Coming Up Next: The Extent of the Perceptual Window in Comic Reading.
Article in Cognitive science, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent models of sequential narratives suggest that readers form predictions about upcoming panels as they read. However, previous work has considered these predictions only in terms of currently viewed information. In the current studies, we investigate to what extent readers are using information from un-fixated panels in comic stories. Using the moving-window paradigm, we studied whether reading behavior was disrupted when upcoming panels were unavailable to the reader, in short comic strips (Experiment 1) and multipage comics (Experiment 2). Both studies showed the greatest disruption to reading when all peripheral information was removed, but such changes persisted when only partial peripheral information was available. The results indicate that readers are making use of information from at least two panels ahead of the current fixation location. We consider these findings in relation to the PINS model of comic reading, and how the role of peripheral information might be further explored.
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.