ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2026
Effects of flanker size and flanker eccentricity on the spatial integration of orthographic information.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the impact of flanker size and horizontal flanker eccentricity in the reading version of the flankers task. Critical targets and the corresponding flankers were words that could either be the same or different. Target size did not change, and flankers could either be the same size as targets or larger. Flankers could be located close to targets (normal spacing - close flankers) or separated from targets by seven spaces (distant flankers). Results revealed significant effects of flanker relatedness (same word as the target or a different word) that interacted with both flanker size and flanker eccentricity in the analysis of response times. The three-way interaction was not significant. The only significant effect in the analysis of error rates was that of flanker relatedness. We replicated prior findings showing that increasing flanker eccentricity diminishes the effect of flanker relatedness, and we further demonstrated that increasing flanker size increases the magnitude of flanker effects. Crucially, an increase in flanker size was not found to compensate for the negative impact of an increase in flanker eccentricity on effects of flanker relatedness. These results suggest that eccentricity is one key visual factor influencing the spatial integration of orthographic information, and that the impact of eccentricity overrides the impact of flanker size. This provides support for the hypothesized scale-invariant gaze-centered processing of letter identities during the initial phase of orthographic processing.
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.