Assessing the role of different spatial frequencies in word perception by good and poor readers
(2005) In Memory & Cognition 33(6). p.961-971- Abstract
- Numerous studies indicate that dyslexic and nondyslexic individuals exhibit different patterns of sensitivity to spatial frequency. However, the extension of this effect to normal (nondyslexic) adults of good and poor reading abilities and the role played by different spatial frequencies in word perception have yet to be determined. In this study, using normal (nondyslexic) adults, we assessed reading ability, spatial frequency sensitivity, and perception of spatially filtered words and nonwords (using a twoalternative forced choice paradigm to avoid artifactual influences of nonperceptual guesswork). Good and poor readers showed different patterns of spatial frequency sensitivity. However, no differences in accuracy of word and nonword... (More)
- Numerous studies indicate that dyslexic and nondyslexic individuals exhibit different patterns of sensitivity to spatial frequency. However, the extension of this effect to normal (nondyslexic) adults of good and poor reading abilities and the role played by different spatial frequencies in word perception have yet to be determined. In this study, using normal (nondyslexic) adults, we assessed reading ability, spatial frequency sensitivity, and perception of spatially filtered words and nonwords (using a twoalternative forced choice paradigm to avoid artifactual influences of nonperceptual guesswork). Good and poor readers showed different patterns of spatial frequency sensitivity. However, no differences in accuracy of word and nonword perception were found between good and poor readers, despite their differences in spatial frequency sensitivity. Indeed, both reading abilities showed the same superior perceptibility for spatially filtered words over nonwords across different spatial frequency bands. These findings indicate that spatial frequency sensitivity differences extend to normal (nondyslexic) adult readers and that a range of spatial frequencies can be used for word perception by good and poor readers. However, spatial frequency sensitivity may not accurately reveal an individual’s ability to perceive words. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/2205473
- author
- Patching, Geoffrey LU and Jordan, Timothy
- publishing date
- 2005
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Memory & Cognition
- volume
- 33
- issue
- 6
- pages
- 961 - 971
- publisher
- Springer
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:33645089226
- ISSN
- 1532-5946
- DOI
- 10.3758/BF03193205
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- no
- id
- c7946736-2a09-4f6e-91ef-5ebfd462867f (old id 2205473)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 11:33:21
- date last changed
- 2022-01-26 07:03:36
@article{c7946736-2a09-4f6e-91ef-5ebfd462867f,
abstract = {{Numerous studies indicate that dyslexic and nondyslexic individuals exhibit different patterns of sensitivity to spatial frequency. However, the extension of this effect to normal (nondyslexic) adults of good and poor reading abilities and the role played by different spatial frequencies in word perception have yet to be determined. In this study, using normal (nondyslexic) adults, we assessed reading ability, spatial frequency sensitivity, and perception of spatially filtered words and nonwords (using a twoalternative forced choice paradigm to avoid artifactual influences of nonperceptual guesswork). Good and poor readers showed different patterns of spatial frequency sensitivity. However, no differences in accuracy of word and nonword perception were found between good and poor readers, despite their differences in spatial frequency sensitivity. Indeed, both reading abilities showed the same superior perceptibility for spatially filtered words over nonwords across different spatial frequency bands. These findings indicate that spatial frequency sensitivity differences extend to normal (nondyslexic) adult readers and that a range of spatial frequencies can be used for word perception by good and poor readers. However, spatial frequency sensitivity may not accurately reveal an individual’s ability to perceive words.}},
author = {{Patching, Geoffrey and Jordan, Timothy}},
issn = {{1532-5946}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{6}},
pages = {{961--971}},
publisher = {{Springer}},
series = {{Memory & Cognition}},
title = {{Assessing the role of different spatial frequencies in word perception by good and poor readers}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03193205}},
doi = {{10.3758/BF03193205}},
volume = {{33}},
year = {{2005}},
}