Development of serial processing in reading and rapid naming

Protopapas, Athanassios; Altani, Angeliki; Georgiou, George K.

doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2013.08.004

Cited by 106 publications

(172 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

129

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, as can be seen in Figure 3, the efficiency of processing downstream items brings with it a requirement that the advance information about items and the order of those items must be accurately stored in working memory until it is used by the articulatory system. This model of RAN performance is consistent with the Protopapas et al (2013) proposal that developmental changes in RAN performance are driven primarily by an increased ability to process RAN items in a cascaded manner, such that multiple subsequent RAN items are processed simultaneously as they are passed through a ‘pipeline’ of different stages of processing. As pointed out by Protopapas et al, such parallel processing of successive items benefits from the automatization of processes concerned with individual items (visual processing, articulation) but also requires adequate executive control to schedule and monitor the processing of multiple items in parallel processing cascades.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…That is, participants who are more likely to make regressive eye movements in the RAN are more likely to make them during reading. While this finding provides some support for the idea that the RAN-reading relation occurs because both tasks tap the same ability to control eye movements (Clark et al 2005; Kuperman & Van Dyke, 2011; see Protopapas et al 2013 for discussion), the finding that increased EVS in the RAN predicts decreased rate of first-pass regressions during reading does not involve a straightforward correspondence of eye movements across the two tasks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…This similarity has led to suggestions that in part the RAN is related to reading at least because it provides a sensitive measure of how well the eyes move and attention shifts when processing a sequence of items with this layout (Clarke, Hulme & Snowling, 2005; Kuperman & Van Dyke, 2011). However, the association between RAN performance and reading is equally strong when RAN items are named in reverse order as in the usual order (Scarborough & Domgaard, 1998; Protopapas, Atanki & Georgiou, 2013), a finding that suggests that any contribution of scanning ability to the RAN-reading relation does not depend on the specific pattern of eye movements that has been practiced through reading.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effective scheduling of looking and talking during rapid automatized naming.

Gordon¹,

Hoedemaker²

2016

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) is strongly related to literacy gains in developing readers, reading disabilities and reading ability in children and adults. Because successful RAN performance depends on the close coordination of a number of abilities, it is unclear what specific skills drive this RAN-reading relationship. The current study used concurrent recordings of young adult participants’ vocalizations and eye movements during the RAN task to assess how individual variation in RAN performance depends on the coordination of visual and vocal processes. Results showed that fast RAN times are facilitated by having the eyes one or more items ahead of the current vocalization, as long as the eyes do not get so far ahead of the voice as to require a regressive eye movement to an earlier item. These data suggest that optimizing RAN performance is a problem of scheduling eye movements and vocalization given memory constraints and the efficiency of encoding and articulatory control. Both RAN completion time (conventionally used to indicate RAN performance) and eye-voice relations predicted some aspects of participants’ eye movements on a separate sentence reading task. However, eye-voice relations predicted additional features of first-pass reading that were not predicted by RAN completion time. This shows that measurement of eye-voice patterns can identify important aspects of individual variation in reading that are not identified by the standard measure of RAN performance. We argue that RAN performance predicts reading ability because both tasks entail challenges of scheduling cognitive and linguistic processes that operate simultaneously on multiple linguistic inputs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effective scheduling of looking and talking during rapid automatized naming.

Gordon¹,

Hoedemaker²

2016

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, we do not think this had a major effect on our results. Protopapas, Altani, and Georgiou (2013) administered both serial and discrete naming tasks on a computer and found similar relations with word reading as in the current study.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Parallel and serial reading processes in children’s word and nonword reading.

Boer

Jong

2015

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fluent reading is characterized by rapid and accurate identification of words. It is commonly accepted that such identification relies on the availability of orthographic knowledge. However, whether this orthographic knowledge should be seen as an accumulation of word-specific knowledge in a lexicon acquired through decoding or as a well-developed associative network of sublexical units is still under debate. We studied this key issue in reading research by looking at the serial and/or parallel reading processes underlying word and nonword reading. Participants were 314 Dutch 2nd, 3rd, and 5th graders. The children were administered digit, word, and nonword naming tasks. We used latent class analyses to distinguish between readers who processed the letter strings serially or in parallel, based on the correlation patterns of word and nonword reading with serial and discrete digit naming. The 2 classes of readers were distinguished for both word and nonword reading. The validity of these classes was supported by differences in sensitivity to word and nonword length. Interestingly, the different classes seemed to reflect a developmental shift from reading all letter strings serially toward parallel processing of words, and later of nonwords. The results are not fully in line with current theories on the representation of orthographic knowledge. Implications in terms of models of the reading process are discussed.

show abstract

“…Rapid automatized naming (RAN), defined as the ability to name as fast as possible highly familiar visual stimuli, such as digits, letters, colors, and objects, is a strong predictor of reading in all languages studied so far (e.g., Finnish: Lepola, Poskiparta, Laakkonen, & Niemi, 2005; Greek: Protopapas, Altani, & Georgiou, 2013;German: Moll, Fussenegger, Willburger, & Landerl, 2009;Dutch: de Jong & van der Leij, 1999;English: Parrila, Kirby, & McQuarrie, 2004;Korean: Cho & Chiu, in press; Chinese: Pan et al, 2011). In most previous studies, the score in RAN has been the total time it takes an individual to name the entire series of stimuli.…”

Section: Languages: Evidence From a More Representative Sample Of Chimentioning

confidence: 99%