Literature DB >> 11913744

Letter detection in very familiar texts.

S N Greenberg1, J Tai.   

Abstract

In the present study, we investigated whether patterns of letter detection for function and content words in texts are affected by the familiarity of the material being read. In Experiment 1, subjects searched for target letters in sentences that had been rehearsed prior to performing the letter detection on them as well as on unfamiliar sentences. In Experiment 2, subjects searched for target letters in highly familiar verses (e.g., nursery rhymes) and in unfamiliar sentences that were matched to the familiar verses. A disadvantage in letter detection for function as compared with content words consistently found with unfamiliar passages was reduced significantly with the familiar material in both experiments. Specifically, letter detection for content words grew worse in familiar text, but letter detection for function words showed a contrasting modest, though nonsignificant, improvement. The results are consistent with the proposition that in very familiar texts, parafoveal analysis permits the identification of generally less familiar content words. Simultaneously, the normal pattern of weighing the structure and content elements of text changes so that more fixations on function words occur than when one is reading unfamiliar texts.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11913744     DOI: 10.3758/bf03206377

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  22 in total

1.  Lexical processing and text integration of function and content words: evidence from priming and eye fixations.

Authors:  A R Schmauder; R K Morris; D V Poynor
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2000-10

2.  The effects of syntactic structure on letter detection in adjacent function words.

Authors:  S N Greenberg; A Koriat; A Shapiro
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1992-11

3.  The level-of-focal-attention hypothesis in oral reading: influence of strategies on the context specificity of lexical repetition effects.

Authors:  L A Carlson; A R Alejano; T H Carr
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 3.051

4.  Effects of contextual constraint on eye movements in reading: A further examination.

Authors:  K Rayner; A D Well
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1996-12

5.  Detection errors onthe andand: Evidence for reading units larger than the word.

Authors:  A Drewnowski; A F Healy
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1977-11

6.  The influence of word function in the missing-letter effect: further evidence from French.

Authors:  J Saint-Aubin; M Poirier
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1997-09

7.  Word frequency effects and eye movements during two readings of a text.

Authors:  G E Raney; K Rayner
Journal:  Can J Exp Psychol       Date:  1995-06

8.  Investigating the boundaries of reading units: letter detection in misspelled words.

Authors:  A F Healy; A Drewnowski
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1983-06       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Proofreading familiar text: allocating resources to perceptual and conceptual processes.

Authors:  B A Levy; J Begin
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1984-11

10.  Proofreading familiar text: constraints on visual processing.

Authors:  B A Levy
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1983-01
View more
  2 in total

1.  The impact of letter detection on eye movement patterns during reading: Reconsidering lexical analysis in connected text as a function of task.

Authors:  Seth N Greenberg; Albrecht W Inhoff; Ulrich W Weger
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.143

2.  The influence of multiple readings on the missing-letter effect revisited.

Authors:  Jean Saint-Aubin; Anie Roy-Charland; Raymond M Klein
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2007-10
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.