Writing systems are a recent cultural invention, which makes it unlikely that specific cognitive mechanisms have developed through selective pressure for reading itself. Instead, reading might capitalize on evolutionary older mechanisms that originally supported other tasks. Accordingly, animals such as baboons can be trained to perform visual word recognition. This suggests that the visual mechanisms supporting reading might be phylogenetically old and domain-general. Here we propose that if the human reading system relies on domain-general visual mechanisms, effects that are typically found within the domain of reading should also be observable with non-orthographic visual stimuli. To test this hypothesis, we systematically tested different types of visual material with the same experimental design. Subjects were passively familiarized with a set of composite visual items, and then tested in an oddball paradigm for their ability to detect novel stimuli. Some of these novel stimuli shared their statistical structure with the familiar items, and were found to be hard to detect in two experiments using strings of letter-like symbols; this replicates the well-known, and supposedly reading-specific, bigram effect. Crucially, in two further experiments we show that the same effect emerges with made-up, 3D objects and sinusoidal gratings. The effect size was equivalent across experiments, despite the use of radically different stimuli. These data suggest that a fundamental mechanism behind visual word learning also supports the learning of other visual stimuli, implying that such mechanism is general-purpose. This mechanism would enable the statistical learning of regularities in the visual environment.
Visual word identification is based on an early morphological analysis in one’s native language; how these mechanisms apply to a second language is much less clear. We recruited L1 Italian–L2 English speakers in a masked priming task where the relationship between prime and target was morphologically transparent, e.g., employer–EMPLOY, morphologically opaque, e.g., corner-CORN, or merely orthographic, e.g., brothel–BROTH. Critically, participants underwent a thorough testing of their lexical, morphological, phonological, spelling and semantic proficiency in their second language. By exploring a wide spectrum of L2 proficiency, we showed that this factor critically qualifies L2 priming. Genuine morphological facilitation only arises as proficiency grows; and opaque and orthographic priming shrink as L2 competence increases. Age of acquisition was also evaluated, and did not affect the priming pattern. Furthermore, we showed that L2 priming is modulated by sensitivity to probabilistic relationships between form and meaning. Overall, these data illustrate the trajectory towards a fully consolidated L2 lexicon, and show that masked priming is a key tracker of this process.
Several methods for teaching draftsmanship include exercises based on
Edward?s ?inversion? technique, the practice of copying from upside-down
originals. We tested the technique by asking 40 artistically untrained
participants to copy either upright or upside-down drawings of a face or a
car. Our results indicate that participants were faster when copying the car
in comparison to the face, but not when copying upside-down in comparison to
upright images. In addition, they were more accurate in capturing the global
proportions of the image in comparison to the local proportions of its parts.
However, neither the face nor the car were copied more accurately in the
upside-down relative to the right-side up condition. These results provide no
evidence that Edward?s inversion technique promotes greater resemblance to
the original stimulus image. Implications for the cognitive psychology of
drawing and for the pedagogy of the visual arts are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.