1999
DOI: 10.1097/00006324-199911000-00025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Are the Benefits of Sentence Context Different in Central and Peripheral Vision?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
28
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, none of those studies compensated for the reduced resolution of the retinal periphery by increasing letter size. When letter size has been appropriately magnified, it has been found that sentence context is as beneficial at the periphery as it is at the fovea (Fine et al, 1999;Fine & Peli, 1996).…”
Section: Finementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, none of those studies compensated for the reduced resolution of the retinal periphery by increasing letter size. When letter size has been appropriately magnified, it has been found that sentence context is as beneficial at the periphery as it is at the fovea (Fine et al, 1999;Fine & Peli, 1996).…”
Section: Finementioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is also possible that, like the benefit of sentence context on reading lists of words, there will be no difference in performance between the fovea and the periphery (Fine, Hazel, Petre, & Rubin, 1999;Fine & Peli, 1996).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fine et al [3] showed that the recognition of sentence context increases reading speed relative to reading unrelated words. Thus, a sentence context that has a meaning leads to faster reading speed [3]. McMahon, Hansen and Viana [16] postulated that sequencing a sentence or visual information in general has an impact on reading speed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reading performance RH-subjects showed a trend for slower reading speed [3][4][5][6][7] Table 4. When compared with the RH-group, LH-subjects had significantly poorer scores on NEI-VFQ subscales general health and social functioning (difference for general health=16.86, difference for social functioning=11.54, both p<0.05).…”
Section: Reading Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…This effect was not found in patients with a central scotoma when reading with the inferior part of the retina [15], but was well marked in a simulation study in which participants read with the nasal part of the retina [17]. It is conceivable that the benefits of contextual effect counteract to a certain extent limitations resulting from crowding effects, reduced visual span and eye movement problems.…”
Section: Context In Paragraphed Textmentioning
confidence: 92%